TT Free-mo

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby Bill Dixon » Sat Aug 02, 2014 10:47 pm

I am glad to see there is some interest in TT-Free-mo. It may be a while before there are enough of us for a good sized setup but this is a start towards that.

A few thoughts.

The end loops are a bit of a cop-out to the Free-mo concept. Free-mo is not supposed to be a Loop-to-Loop layout.
However as noted above, since it will be a while before anybody else is adding modules to my projected display, I think it is a reasonable compromise to get something running.

I have been considering the rail height.
I chose code 70 rail because it will run most equipment. However Code 55 track does look better and some people will want to build modules with that rail size. How you join module with different rail sizes together depends on how the modules are built.
If the track runs right to the edge, something I am looking more closely at, you just line up the tops of the rails when clamping the modules together.
If you are using the one inch setback then you need adapter rails (code 55 to code 70) or adapter rail joiners - code 55 rail with a brass shim soldered to the bottom of the rail, all in a code 70 rail joiner.
Running the rails to the edge of the module is looking more interesting.

Module height. Since we are trying to generate interest at public displays, the more public friendly height of 42" to the rail head is perhaps the preferred choice. Those who want to run at the more visually appealing height of 50" can make convertible legs.

More thoughts are brewing. I'll post if and when they jell.
Regards
Bill Dixon
TT-Tracks
North Vancouver, BC
Bill Dixon
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:57 pm
Location: North Vancouver, B.C.

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby ConducTTor » Sun Aug 03, 2014 12:53 am

Bill I agree with all of the above :thumbup:
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby j p » Sun Aug 03, 2014 10:01 am

Bernd wrote:Bill,

I like what you have presented so far. I think sticking with Code70 for the main line would be a good idea. The individual module owner could then come off the main with Code55 or even Code40 for the sidings to an industry or what ever. Main line sidings should be of the same Code as the main line.

I have a module I'd like to build. It'll be of an locomotive erection shop. Since it will be larger than the normal module my plan is to build a main module with your set of standards and then from there "Y" off from a main siding to the erection shop with Code55 rail. Those are the wishful plans I have. Now that a standard is set for the main modules I can start thinking about getting started on that project.

Bernd


Code70 it is - as Bill suggested.
Code55 may be acceptable if assembled carefully. Filigran track works well. Hand made track with spikes should be checked for compatibility with HP Products and Tillig equipment. I don't think that compatibility with old Zeuke/BTTB and Rokal is needed.
Code40 is no way since that would be incompatible with RTR equipment. The only possibility for Code40 would be to use it for non-operational tracks (=scenery). You can have a piece of a narrow-gauge line on your module with even smaller rails.
j p
 
Posts: 1200
Images: 69
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: TT Free-mo Module Height

Postby railtwister » Sun Aug 03, 2014 10:45 am

As far as module height is concerned, after building and displaying modules in several scales (N, HO, On30, and O 3-rail) to the general public at shows, I have become convinced that a lower table height (30"-36") is better, even though I have chosen a much higher height for my own home layout (56"). The lower height allows the kids to see the trains without feeling like they have to pull themselves up on the edge of the modules to get a better view, plus it it much better for any adults who may be restricted to a wheelchair or mobility scooter (which seem to be much more common in recent years). Any future module projects that I may undertake will be at lower heights such as this.

Recently, I have also been building my modules to use a simple 2"x2" leg each of which is rigidly secured into each corner of the module using a single thumbscrew/tee-nut (I use a 1/4"-20 x 2" eyebolt, for no tools needed attachment) through a 45 degree corner brace. This design is much lighter in weight and easier to build construction than all other removable or folding legs that I have tried in the past, plus it allows for easily interchangeable legs to be used to set the module up at different heights, if desired. The four legs can be strapped into a tight bundle using Velcro tape for easy transport and storage.

Taller table heights are great for personal home layouts, and should be set at whatever height the builder desires, but a lower height is much better for displaying your modules to the general public.

Bill in FtL
railtwister
 
Posts: 699
Images: 4
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:39 am
Location: Oakland Park (Ft. Lauderdale), FL, USA

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby j p » Sun Aug 03, 2014 1:54 pm

Code55 with PC ties should be OK.
Your branch line then Code55 too. Code40 may cause problems to other people's cars! No problem with the engines, you can limit the access to the branch line only to your own engines but remember that your branch line should be able to receive interchange cars from any module. They would come on freight trains on the main line and get uncoupled at the exchange station for your branch. Then your engine takes them and delivers to their destination on the branch line.

Anyway, it would be an advantage to have the possibility for running any locomotive also on the branch. Imagine that someone comes to a module meeting with a very rare engine and you'd like to see it on your branch line...
j p
 
Posts: 1200
Images: 69
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby j p » Mon Aug 04, 2014 1:30 am

Bernd wrote:
j p wrote: Imagine that someone comes to a module meeting with a very rare engine and you'd like to see it on your branch line...


Imagine if I showed up with my Sherline lathe and offered to turn down his flanges so he could run on my branchline. :shock: :o :lol:

Bernd


You'd get most likely "no thanks". :lol: :lol:
j p
 
Posts: 1200
Images: 69
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby Bill Dixon » Sun Aug 31, 2014 3:57 pm

Not doing much with TT-Free-Mo yet.
No $$ or track.

Been thinking about the length of mainline I will have and what to do about making it longer or appearing longer.
Building more modules is the obvious answer but there is going to be a limit to what I can personally build and transport.
I hope that more modelers will build modules but that will take time.

So thinking about double track on modules, if I never put crossovers between the two lines, they will in effect be two separate tracks. If there is a scene on both tracks on a module I can only get from one scene to the other by running to the end of the display and coming back on the other track. That effectively doubles the length of my mainline. Something to consider.
Regards
Bill Dixon
TT-Tracks
North Vancouver, BC
Bill Dixon
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:57 pm
Location: North Vancouver, B.C.

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby Bill Dixon » Mon Sep 01, 2014 6:50 pm

Not having track has given me more time to doodle.
I have changed my end loop module design to something simpler and easier to build.

201400901 TT-Free-Mo End Loop.jpg

As you can see it is a two part module that folds up for transport. It takes three legs, two for the larger piece and one for the smaller.
There is a fixed end plate at the right side, which also serves as somewhere to put logos and such.
There will be a removable plate on the left side to protect track ends.

To setup, put the legs under the large piece. Remove transport bolts and left transport plate.
Unfold left piece and add leg. Bolt or clamp together.

Scenery will be mostly flat utilitarian but I am thinking of a removable foam ridge with a tunnel to scenically split the two sides of he loop.

The DCC command station sits in a pocket in the center of the loop. One of the UP5s on the main loop will be a UR92 radio receiver. The other end loop will be the same except it will have a DCC booster instead of the command station.

The gaps in the reversing loop will the the gaps in the track where it crosses the folding joint.

Where the track diagonally crosses the folding joint it is a little close to the edge so a small piece will need to be added to give more protection for derailed equipment.
The end radius is 16", the largest I can use and still have 2" clearance at the edges on this size of module.
A larger end radius will require a larger module pair.
Regards
Bill Dixon
TT-Tracks
North Vancouver, BC
Bill Dixon
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:57 pm
Location: North Vancouver, B.C.

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby railtwister » Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:12 pm

Interesting idea. I think if I were to build it though, I would use three legs on the larger section, two along the hinge line and one at the middle of the right side (your sketch actually shows 4 on this section). I think you could get away with just one leg for the smaller folding section, right in the middle of it's left side, relying on the hinges for support on it's right side. Presumably, any module attaching to the loop would also have it's own legs, thus providing additional support. Otherwise, you could use two legs on the left side of smaller section, with three on the larger one, making for a total of five legs for the two module end loop set.

I would also make the smaller section a trapezoid rather than just a rectangle, with both module sections having the same 36" length along the hinged joint. This would have the advantage of not requiring any extra measures to protect the train from the "edge of the world" as it crosses the joint between the module halves. It would also make the two sections look better when set up, and would make the smaller section only slightly heavier than the rectangle as originally shown. Since the two are permanently held together by the hinges, this shouldn't make much difference in transporting difficulty for the pair. If weight is a big concern, you could also lop off the two corners on the right side of the larger module, using a 45 degree bevel at 6", making the larger module's right edge three-sided rather than just a straight line. I find that unless you have a particular scenic treatment in mind for that corner space, lopping off the corners makes the module a bit lighter and also makes it seem a little less unwieldy.

When set up using my modifications, you would have an irregularly shaped octagon for the end loop, rather than two different sizes of rectangles.

Bill in FtL
railtwister
 
Posts: 699
Images: 4
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:39 am
Location: Oakland Park (Ft. Lauderdale), FL, USA

Re: TT Free-mo

Postby ConducTTor » Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:51 pm

I would make that module utilitarian and add a couple (or more) storage tracks in the middle of the loop. Although, you can still scenic around the tracks.
Attachments
a.png
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

PreviousNext

Return to Layouts / Track Plans

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests