First build thread - N scale experimentaion, ideas, and putting some things together


F

FlyFishn

Member
I figured I would start somewhat of a build thread, though with no real target or end goal as that is still evolving.

Some initial considerations for my ideas:
- Large locomotive capacity such as longer 6 axle units (SD70, SD60, GE ES44DC, etc)
It looks like a 15" minimum turn radius would be a good idea. I have seen as wide as 18" recommended and some say never, on any layout, go below 11".
- Double main line loop with turn outs to cross between
- DCC control, wireless
- Mountain scene
- Staging area with closed loop, split off access run off main line to access - not direct off the main line loops
- Lots of elevation changes, possibly a mountain loop on top with intricate gorges and tunnels, though I'd like tunnels on the main line.
- Modular design for moving/portability
- Flowing water?

It seems era is a common defining point. I would say modern. I don't have any particular era going back in time that I would want to specifically model. Though, I do like steam locomotives. From a scale perspective I wouldn't be too concerned with steam being out of place with a modern layout. Maybe I could do a nostalgic steam passenger train at some point. I have several steam locomotives, but I think most of them are HO. I don't know if I have one for N yet. I have to dig out my train stuff from my parents basement... all I have right now is some of my O27 and HO, N is still MIA.

I am pretty sure the track I have is all Code 80. I don't think I have many, if any, turn outs yet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
After some measuring it appears the space I have available is an L shape, 7ft 4in on the short side, 9ft on the long side, and the L shape is the same as the letter. The high point of the long side is the door to the room and the short side bottom of the L is mostly a window.

The up side to my idea here is the room is mostly storage - the longest wall opposite of the door is a 2x4/plywood shelving system. The long side of the layout idea here would be additional storage space underneath. I won't be taking up much cubic footage of the room at all.

My idea as of now is to use the corner of the L as a helix to a lower level staging area under the window. I want a double main line around the perimeter of the L somehow.

I don't want to come out from the long wall too far, nor the short window side (I need to access to the windows to open/close), with desk space, but I want to allow enough space to get the right radius curves in. The main line needs to be a loop. The only point-to-point lines I want are in a yard layout, if at all, and staging. Any other runs off the main line loops will have double ended access to the main line.

Here is a rough scale sketch - 1 inch is 1 foot.

For the sketch I filled in the outside sides with a flat desk space at 3ft/36" out to give some 2 dimensional perspective. This was determined based off the 15 inch minimum turn radius for the track. However, I did not account for a double main line. Outside of the 15" radius curves (at the ends of the L shape, for example) I allowed for 3", equal to 1/4" on the scale drawing, for the track and a bit extra spacing (likewise, around the ID circle of the helix). I haven't figured up what the proper dimensions are for track spacing yet, but I have a feeling I need to allow for another 1.5-2" for a second outside track. The 9ft side (long side of the L) gets pretty short once the short side is filled in with the helix etc.

IMG_5676 small.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Edsland - I am not quite sure what your frame of reference is to "access" to the far corner. However, a couple lines of thought:

- I don't want to waste the space of the top of the helix. This will likely be covered up on top with a mountain and other terrain/structure. I want to have the entrance/exit to the helix in the back, unless I change up the idea I have in my head thus far and open up the front of the table to pass the main line further out. So, in this case, access to the "corner" from the top will be blocked.

- The staging area would be the lower level of the short side. I am not quite sure yet how I want to do it, or how far apart the levels should be. I also don't know what kind of grade I should go after for the helix (or any other grades on the layout). I did not take grade in to consideration in the rough sketch here. However, I need to be careful of the rise/distance so that at a minimum the grade allows for clean separation between the rings of the helix so the train can pass with no issue of hitting. The steeper the grade the more the gap, and the wider the radius of the curves, for the same grade, the more the gap as the circumference of the track would be longer. However, I don't have much space to work with so expanding the radius of the helix, in this case, might not be very workable.

- From the bottom the helix should be accessible. As to the far corner behind the helix - it would be pretty hard to get to it until underneath the lower level/bottom of the helix.

I can always fence the helix, also, so there wouldn't be much risk of trains derailing and falling back behind.
 
Here is a picture set of a layout that I came across which uses a helix.

http://s448.photobucket.com/user/4x2dsp/library/?sort=6&page=1

The construction technique is pretty neat with the L brackets supporting the helix circles. That might be my best bet - the metal L brackets will keep the thickness of the build construction to a minimum. The only thing I don't like about that construction technique in the pictures is the uprights alternate between inside and outside the helix. I assume this is to keep the deck from rotating downward away from the inside only uprights or downward in to the center for outside uprights. Having uprights inside will allow for uninhibited access all the way around from the outside, except for the area nearest the corner.

Keeping that thin deck profile will make it easier to hit a lower grade with a tighter track radius. However, in some research, specifically reading the below thread, it appears something to keep in mind in the track design through a helix is the "apparent grade" where the drag of the circling train up a set grade adds resistance such that the affect of the total drag on the train would be equal to a grade of which is steeper than it really is.

Reference thread for above paragraph:
http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/9982
 
One thing you can count on is that trains will eventually derail in the least convenient location possible. If your helix is in a corner where two walls meet, then a derailment on the helix may mean an uncomfortable crawl under the layout to fix the problem. For some of us, the need to crawl under the layout to reach a derailment is something we would rather avoid. We would prefer to have easier access than that!

It's the same reason one might avoid putting a turnout inside a tunnel. It's almost guaranteed that will be the one turnout that gives you trouble!

Anyway, you seem to be well on your way, and I hope you'll use this thread to show us your progress!

- Jeff
 
What are everyone's thoughts on the 1x3 or 1x4 frame construction that seems popular? Is it strong enough to stand on - provided the top plywood is thick enough/supported enough that that top plywood won't break? Or are the 1x's too thin to transfer much load to the uprights through screws = will split easy and fail?

My shelving system is 3/8" ply. With the distance of the framing underneath (2x4's) it isn't supported close enough to withstand "standing" on, but the frame itself is more than sturdy - I would venture a guess that there is well over 500lbs sitting on 5 legs (4 at the corners, an X brace in the back to transfer the sagging load to the 2 back corners, and one upright in the middle on the bottom to transfer the sagging load to the floor in the middle). With all that is on it I still wouldn't hesitate standing on it (the frame) if I could.

For reference here, I'm a young guy. I don't particularly want to be climbing around the layout, but in accessing places that are hard to reach that is a sacrifice I can live with to get a larger layout. I used to climb towers for a living and still do it for a hobby (ham radio). A table isn't much of an issue.

If I can get by with 1x's for framing that will keep weight down also. For some other projects I have used 2x3's with success. I presume there are different grades of wood, also. What I envision as a 1x3 or 1x4 is fairly rough sawn, soft pine. Perhaps there is a different grade that would be best used?

More to come. This is fun stuff just thinking about it.
 
1" x 4" and 1/2" plywood top is more than sufficient for benchwork framing. I space the cross bracing every 32", but my widest benchwork is 24". If you're wider than that, I would use 24" or even 18". It also depends on whether or not you will ever be climbing on top of it. With minimal bracing, 1/2" plywood will not flex. You should use 2" x 2" for legs although 1" x 4" would work. 2" x 2" just looks more professional to me, not that it matters.
Crawling under for access is pretty much up to the individual, but it won't get any easier with age. It is unavoidable with a helix though.

Willie
 
From scaling the pictures I took of an N scale layout with a double main line it appears the track spacing is pretty close to 3/4" between the two inside rails of the two parallel tracks. Does anyone have any thoughts on that dimension? That is roughly 1.25" between track centers (what I am sketching out in my CAD layout for a sample run).
 
Here are a couple screen shots of what I have going so far.

The helix is going to be under the table, but there will be terrain over the top so the track can clear on the front and give it some more intricacy. The back side/corner I envision as a tunnel on top (perhaps a removable tunnel so I can pull it off if I need to for access).

The spur on the lower left I think I want to turn in to an above-table yard. Under this short wing of the L, on the bottom of the helix, I want to do a staging yard. I am not sure if that all makes sense, though - maybe I could do without the yard on top? What do you think?

I made the long side of the L 4ft instead of 3ft. I think that gives me a bit more "room", but I may need to chop the corner off. The "top" of the L is where the door to the room is, so the table sticking out this far may impede room access/moving around.

I was thinking of having a reverse loop in the yard. However, my minimum turn radius on the inside main line loop is already at 15 inches here - which is my minimum desired. I suppose another way I could reverse a train is to continue the yard spur across to the other side and switch it back in. What do you think?

If only the space I had was bigger... Lots of possibilities, though. I guess with this layout I don't want to get too deep with it. After all, the goal is primarily to experiment with DCC control. The "layout" doesn't affect that really.

Layout with helix
A.with helix.jpg

Top of layout without helix visible
A.without helix.jpg
 
Jeff -

It looks like NMRA says a 14-1/2" radius with a 1-1/4" spacing for class I is acceptable, I could go down to 1-5/32" spacing and be OK, but the higher 1-1/4" suits (3/32" wider). I think that is the class I am going to be running - class I - larger 6 axle truck locomotives.

It looks like long passenger cars might be the only challenge on my layout the way I have started designing it, so I am OK with that for now. I want to run freight trains for the most part. I am not sure if I have any N steam locomotives either, not saying I can't run them later though - I just need to know the limits. If I have the room later I can cross the bridge of working that out at that point.
 
A couple of things to keep in mind.

1. Will my rolling stock run reliably on my desired radius without derailing? This can be affected -- for example -- by whether you have body mounted or truck mounted couplers. Truck mounted couplers may operate reliably on a smaller radius than will body mounted couplers.

2. Will my rolling stock look good on my desired radius? Long passenger cars might run on a given radius but have so much overhang that many people will think they look silly. That may or may not bother you, but it illustrates that reliable running is not the ONLY consideration.

- Jeff
 
Yes, and if the Missus calls out to ask what you're doing, you can reply "Just doing some work at my desk, Dearest!"
 
FlyFishn said:
This is a pretty awesome way to support a layout:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e3/9d/0b/e39d0b3e8dda7d005f0a0c8047388f3e.jpg

Note the caster wheels on the bottom of the supports. On the thin carpet like that I'm sure it works better than what I would call regular household carpet, but it is a novel idea for ease of moving for access, if necessary.
Click to expand...

On carpet, you should get furniture sliders. They're basically just smooth plastic bits with a gentle curve to the edges, but they reduce the effort of sliding things immensely. The large ones I had on my couch worked so well that I had to replace them with smaller ones because I was having to constantly readjust the couch. But, it allows even a decent sized couch to move around without much effort. A heavy trainboard should be relatively easily moved with one.

Which is more or less what I'm doing.

Another thing to consider is that if you want your helix to have less of a footprint, consider making it an oval or some other shape. A circle maximizes the amount of area inside of a given amount of track. It also gives you the option of potentially putting turnouts in without having to make them on the curve itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top