Railroad Line Forums - Construction of the new PRR Northern Division
Railroad Line Forums
Username:
Password:
Save Password


Register
Forgot Password?
  Home   Forums   Events Calendar   Sponsors   Support the RRLine   Guestbook   FAQ     Register
Active Topics | Active Polls | Resources | Members | Online Users | Live Chat | Avatar Legend | Search | Statistics
Photo Album | File Lister | File Library
[ Active Members: 5 | Anonymous Members: 0 | Guests: 117 ]  [ Total: 122 ]  [ Newest Member: csrr70 ]
 All Forums
 Model Railroad Forums
 Model Railroad Construction
 Construction of the new PRR Northern Division
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic |   New Poll New Poll |   Reply to Topic | 
Author Previous Topic: Chuck Diljaks Wyoming Valley Railroad Topic Next Topic: HTRR - Chapter 2
Page: of 95

MarkF
Engineer

Premium Member


Posted - 07/02/2010 :  10:19:46 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Good to hear from you Tim! Long time no hear from! Thanks for your kind comments. Progress is in spurts, the biggest is usually when Bruce is here!

Mark

Country: USA | Posts: 13066 Go to Top of Page

Steam Nut
Fireman



Posted - 07/03/2010 :  09:29:15 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Yeh, After I recharge from my latest health issue we will have another spurt, God that railroad is big! LOL!!!!


Country: USA | Posts: 1752 Go to Top of Page

belg
Fireman



Posted - 07/03/2010 :  10:55:29 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Bruce, did Mark break you again!! Could you give me some tips on how you guys make the holes so they line up correctly as they must change location as the boards are raised and lowered, right?? Pat


Country: USA | Posts: 4500 Go to Top of Page

MarkF
Engineer

Premium Member


Posted - 07/03/2010 :  12:19:03 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by belg

Bruce, did Mark break you again!! Could you give me some tips on how you guys make the holes so they line up correctly as they must change location as the boards are raised and lowered, right?? Pat



Pat, if I understand your question correctly, we used one piece as a 'master pattern' to drill the rest of the holes. There are two holes in each piece. As far as them changing location, I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but no, they don't change location.


Mark

Country: USA | Posts: 13066 Go to Top of Page

Steam Nut
Fireman



Posted - 07/03/2010 :  12:48:01 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Pat, The holes do not change location, The key is to use 5/16 rod and drill 3/8 holes. Use flat washers and start at the bottom and set your grade as you go. The 3/8 hole gives you the room you need to have the helix boards on the angle and the rods straight up. I can see that this has a following and we do some step by step as soon as I get back in the game. We will do the tie in to the main layout and track then do a show on adding the next level.


Country: USA | Posts: 1752 Go to Top of Page

Tim Kerkhoff
Fireman



Posted - 07/07/2010 :  9:47:57 PM  Show Profile  Send Tim Kerkhoff a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
Bruce is right on about making the hole larger than the threaded rod. I found that a little extra room for the rod really helps for lining the helix up. By having rods on both sides you can even build in super elevation. One other thing I did on the top level of the helix was to recess the nut into the wood and cut the rod even with the top so that it did not interfere with scenery.

I almost caught up Mark!



Country: USA | Posts: 5879 Go to Top of Page

Steam Nut
Fireman



Posted - 07/07/2010 :  11:13:18 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I'm not sure witch is bigger, This thread or the Railroad! LOL!


Country: USA | Posts: 1752 Go to Top of Page

Vagel Keller
Crew Chief



Posted - 07/08/2010 :  12:36:06 AM  Show Profile  Visit Vagel Keller's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Whoo-Hoo, Mark! Great progress. Trains running by end of Summer is a great thing to look forward to.

Vagel



Country: USA | Posts: 853 Go to Top of Page

George D
Moderator

Premium Member


Posted - 07/08/2010 :  08:29:21 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Tim Kerkhoff

Bruce is right on about making the hole larger than the threaded rod. I found that a little extra room for the rod really helps for lining the helix up. By having rods on both sides you can even build in super elevation. One other thing I did on the top level of the helix was to recess the nut into the wood and cut the rod even with the top so that it did not interfere with scenery.

I almost caught up Mark!



Iím not sure about super elevation on a helix. String lining (cars being pulled off the track to the inside of the curve) is a problem with longer trains on helixes because of the combination of the grade and curve. I would think tilting the cars to the inside of the curve would only encourage this.

George



Country: USA | Posts: 13636 Go to Top of Page

Tim Kerkhoff
Fireman



Posted - 07/08/2010 :  09:56:45 AM  Show Profile  Send Tim Kerkhoff a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
Hi George,

I guess I should of made myself more clear. There is super elevation and slight super elevation. I only add a slight amount as it seems to help the engines efficiency in pulling the cars up the grade. The other point is that all the helixes that I have built have had 34-38" radius HO scale. On tighter radius the tipping problem is much more apparent and elevating the track would compound the problem. The big point is that by using the threaded rod method you can adjust and re-adjust to fine tune the helix.



Country: USA | Posts: 5879 Go to Top of Page

Neil M
Fireman

Premium Member

Posted - 07/08/2010 :  10:14:57 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by George D

quote:
Originally posted by Tim Kerkhoff

Bruce is right on about making the hole larger than the threaded rod. I found that a little extra room for the rod really helps for lining the helix up. By having rods on both sides you can even build in super elevation. One other thing I did on the top level of the helix was to recess the nut into the wood and cut the rod even with the top so that it did not interfere with scenery.

I almost caught up Mark!



Iím not sure about super elevation on a helix. String lining (cars being pulled off the track to the inside of the curve) is a problem with longer trains on helixes because of the combination of the grade and curve. I would think tilting the cars to the inside of the curve would only encourage this.

George




You may well be right and I haven't tried but what you said made me think.

Superelevation is there (on the real thing) to keep the pressure off the flanges as the train goes round a bend and so that all the weight is taken by the treads of the wheels.

If a curve is not superelevated then the flanges pressing against the inside of the outer rail are all there is to make the train go round the bend.

It seems to me that there is more likelihood of a derailment from the flange picking a joint on an unsuperelevated curve than there is of string-lining a train on either a superelevated curve or an unsuperelevated curve.

Our models do not have a calculated superelevation that causes the wheelsets to naturally run exactly on the tread but the idea is the same and the effect is partially the same?

I would like to hear from people with experience of this though as I don't have any of helices



Built a waterfront HO layout in Ireland http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=22161 but now making a start in On30 in Australia

Country: Australia | Posts: 2424 Go to Top of Page

MarkF
Engineer

Premium Member


Posted - 07/08/2010 :  10:43:51 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Tim Kerkhoff

Bruce is right on about making the hole larger than the threaded rod. I found that a little extra room for the rod really helps for lining the helix up. By having rods on both sides you can even build in super elevation. One other thing I did on the top level of the helix was to recess the nut into the wood and cut the rod even with the top so that it did not interfere with scenery.

I almost caught up Mark!



Thanks for your input Tim. I had actually thought about building in some sort of super elevation but then wondered if I may be adding to my problems rather than solving them with that. With only one level in so far, perhaps Bruce and I can experiement!

As for the top of the helix, yes I am planning the same thing. The track will emerge from a 'tunnel of trees' and the area at the top and center of the helix will contain some type of business. I want to completely hide the fact that there is a helix there.


Mark

Country: USA | Posts: 13066 Go to Top of Page

Tim Kerkhoff
Fireman



Posted - 07/08/2010 :  11:09:20 PM  Show Profile  Send Tim Kerkhoff a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
All this made me start wondering, so I went downstairs and checked several of the helix's. What I actually did was to super elevate the top level as it dissapeared into a tunnel and heads down the helix. The visible portion has the most elevation, but I do have a slight elevation throughout the balance of the helix. This particular helix has 4 turns, so I made up a 50 car train (approx 30') plus engines and pulled the train up without any problem.
Note: My cars are weight to 75% of NMRA standard and use metal JayBee wheelsets
Then decided to add more cars giving me more weight and see if I could pull them over. This time I used 80 cars (approx 47') added more engines to the front and was able to pull the train up the helix. All this was done on a 36" radius. Since I have double track I tried the same thing on the inner track 34.5" radius reduced the number of cars to 57 and then I was able to pull them over. 55 cars or less I was able to pull up without a problem. What does this prove, probably nothing other than the radius plays a major factor in the ability to pull heavier trains up a helix.
I tried the same experiment on another helix with a radius of 36" and the track is flat. The same result occurred, the train was able to make it up the helix without being pulled over.

So all in all I am not sure I learned much of anything but it was fun running long trains on the layout.



Country: USA | Posts: 5879 Go to Top of Page

MarkF
Engineer

Premium Member


Posted - 07/09/2010 :  12:14:18 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
What scares me Tim is that you said 'several of the helix's'. How many do you have???

On my layout, the ONE helix that I am building is a two track helix, representing the two branch lines that come of the main on the lower level and brings the lines up to their respective areas on the upper level. Since these are 'secondary lines', the PRR did not super elevate curves on these lines. While I hadn't given much thought to super elevation, the above discussion made me wonder if super elevating the curves in the helix would be a good safety/operational measure. But it would appear that your 'experiment' has saved me a lot of extra work! So for that I thank you Tim!


Mark

Country: USA | Posts: 13066 Go to Top of Page

hunter48820
Fireman

Premium Member


Posted - 07/09/2010 :  09:12:34 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Mark and Tim,
I also have a helix with 36" and 33.5" radius curves. The inside track is the ascending track (I wish it was the reverse but don't really know if it makes that much difference!).

I didn't superelevate the tracks in the helix and have never had a problem. The trains have been up into the 30 car range at most. This helix takes all trains at the north end of the railroad into and out of staging at the 16" level up to the first scenicked level at 31". A nolix is used to get to the remaining decks.



Look out for #1, but don't step in #2!

Andy Keeney
Dewitt, MI

Country: USA | Posts: 6117 Go to Top of Page
Page: of 95 Previous Topic: Chuck Diljaks Wyoming Valley Railroad Topic Next Topic: HTRR - Chapter 2  
 New Topic |   New Poll New Poll |   Reply to Topic | 
Previous Page | Next Page
Jump To:
Railroad Line Forums © 2000-14 Railroad Line Co. Go To Top Of Page
Steam was generated in 1.47 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000