I recently read on the County Gate website of the existence of a model railway that uses real water and moving boats called the East German R
I have seen a layout with real water and strangely enough, it does not look as real as some modelled water.
I can't remember what the layout was called and it is a number of years ago but it looked like what it was, a puddle with some toy ships floating on it.
Regards,
Brian T.
Dave Rowe used real water in the canal on his Leighton Buzzard diorama and on his Exmouth (?) GWR broad gauge layout. As far as I can recall both had something that moved through the water, a swan on the 009 layout and a dredger on the standard / broad gauge one but the objects moved quite slowly so as not to create too many (or any) ripples. One (if not both) layouts featured in MRJ but quite some time ago.
I'd agree with Brian that it is not easy to do, having seen a couple of layouts with real moving water that looked fairly bad. Whilst I know that ship designers use (or used to use) scale models of hulls in water tanks to test how they behave it is a fairly exact science, the problem is that real water will always be 1:1 scale and building a 1:76 scale model of a stream bed and allowing water to flow down it will look nothing like the real stream and more like a leaking tap! If you are modelling still water then it can work but as soon as the water starts to move, the layout wobbles, a draught catches the surface or a boat moves too quickly for example, then the illusion is lost.
Thank you for those comments Julien. I think your point is that the illusion of water is easily shattered by the slightest overscale movement and needs to be finely tuned to work. I agree entirely. And if real water was effective, it would be a lot more popular. Normally I would go along with this received wisdom were it not for the comments on the County Gate website where it states:
"All the experts say that this (real water) should never be used and I have to admit that it made sense. That is until I saw the East German R
There was nothing special about what these guys were doing. Obviously a watertight area and the 'shore was moulded in bodyfilla. The water was about 1" deep and a small amout of detergent was added to reduce meniscus. The ships were drawn across using fishing line below the water level with a reel and hand crank each end. At slow speed, the wake looked pretty good to me. The sea bottom was painted dark brown green. That is about all I recall
best
JdF
Thanks JdF, that's a very helpful description. I've managed to ascertain from the NGRM forum, thanks to a kind and knowledgeable fellow hobbyist, that the club is 'Interessengemeinschaft Mecklenburgische Eisenbahnen' and have found their website. Unfortunately, their e-mail address is not to be found on it. I have e-mailed the Eurospoor website so I hope they can provide me with the contact details.
There are also dyes for fishpond water. Presumably they don't dye (or kill!) the fish, but whether any effect would be noticed in such shallow water as in a model I'm not sure.
Mercury has apparently also been used to simulate water in models :-\ :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army)
If one wanted to model muddy water, there must be something that may remain in suspension. Dye is not the answer as the colour of water will be the river bed. In my opinion, the only usage for real water is if one wants a moving boat. Coloured ink perhaps.
Quote from: GraemeD on September 09, 2011, 08:54
There are also dyes for fishpond water. Presumably they don't dye (or kill!) the fish, but whether any effect would be noticed in such shallow water as in a model I'm not sure.
Mercury has apparently also been used to simulate water in models :-\ :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army)
In many cases a black dye is used to remove the possibility of algae growing in the water and turning it green, and to give the illusion of depth to the water - a favorite trick for show gardens at things like Chelsea, where a 3" deep puddle can be made to look like a bottomless pool and give very good reflections of the sky above. Something like that might work on a 4 mm scale model for a deep lake or similar but not to well for shallow water - unless modelling a heavily polluted late 19th / early 20th century urban canal!.
I can't say that I fancy using mercury though - you would need steel RSJs to support the weight of the metal and all the paperwork needed to have that much mercury open and on public display! :o
I'd agree with JdF that the only reason for using real water on a model is if you wanted to have moving water craft (or swans!), and would be tempted to stick with the more traditional metods of modelling water, especially on an exhibition layout.
I've been thinking about this issue recently when considering the design of the layout. It is usually the case that the harbour is put to the front of the layout so that the boats are on full display. I'm trying to keep to the idea of real water as I'd like to have sailing ships moving into dock. However it struck me that the harbour could be at the rear of the layout. While real water could be used to allow ship movements, the problems of its not behaving according to scale would be largely obscured by the rest of the layout.
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on January 15, 2012, 16:37
However it struck me that the harbour could be at the rear of the layout. While real water could be used to allow ship movements, the problems of its not behaving according to scale would be largely obscured by the rest of the layout.
Long ago, whilst on holiday in Scotland, we happened upon what (I assume) is one of the locks on the Caledonian Canal. We hadn't initially seen the canal, nor the water. The only thing we saw were the masts of the yachts moving from one side to the other. That should be modelable although for a lock complex you'd have to come up with a way of raising and lowering the models!
--
Rod
I'll never use real water on a layout after seeing an American layout that used it at Narrow Gauge South West some years ago. It looked ok, until some heffalump wandered past and massive ripples appeared on it's surface - the illusion was totally spoilt, a mechanism to isolate the water from floor vibrations would probably be quite difficult to built.
In my opinion the best water I've ever seen was made by Troels Kirk using plaster and artist's gloss gel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsPkN5rmk9s
Quote from: invercloy on January 15, 2012, 17:32
I'll never use real water on a layout after seeing an American layout that used it at Narrow Gauge South West some years ago. It looked ok, until some heffalump wandered past and massive ripples appeared on it's surface - the illusion was totally spoilt, a mechanism to isolate the water from floor vibrations would probably be quite difficult to built.
I take your point Tom which is why I think putting the water to the back of the layout where it is likely to be obscured by the height of the dockside wall is worth considering. If one of the goals of the layout is to have moving sailing ships and steamships so as to create a vibrant harbour scene, then the best way of moving those ships is through water. Mechanically moving the ships may lead to unnatural movement which would just as much destroy the illusion as the one you described at Narrow Gauge South West. I think that Rod's point is pertinent here. He was able to see yachts moving in the canal without being able to see the canal itself. All that said, I don't underestimate the difficulty of this part of the project and I'll only really know when I try to build it.
John Allen tried real water in the gorge on his Gorre & Daphetid but discovered that it raised the humidity in the railway room to such levels that things warped, track moved and equipment suffered. :o
At one time Pendon had a real water course running down the Dartmoor scene but that was mainly due to the leaky roof in the old shed!
When I was preparing the L&TR for photography last year I decided it was time to do something about the Nant Ffernol. The original surface was a polystyrene ceiling tile painted with mottled browns; under the bridge the colours are subtly darker and given a slight greenish hue. All I did was to apply a coat of gloss varnish and pick out some white water near boulders with white paint. Easy and reasonably passable! (Photo 1.)
The small stream near Mynydd-yn-Bwlch ir represented by the simple use of cling film - an adaption of the ancient method using cellophane. (Photo 2.)
Quote from: Tigger on January 15, 2012, 19:58
John Allen tried real water in the gorge on his Gorre & Daphetid but discovered that it raised the humidity in the railway room to such levels that things warped, track moved and equipment suffered. :o
Many thanks for that comment, Tigger. I'll bear that in mind in future.
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on January 15, 2012, 19:42
I take your point Tom which is why I think putting the water to the back of the layout where it is likely to be obscured by the height of the dockside wall is worth considering.
If you're doing that then I'd be even less inclined to use real water as it'll be less visible. How about a sheet of acrylic painted on the underside which has the faller road system fitted to the boats to guide them around a pre-defined route.
The idea of modelling part of ships moving behind a wall is definitely an interesting concept to pursue though.
For boats moving in real water this is as good as it gets for me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqkgortfczg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5xNdoYBf34
Very impressive! My only issue is that the water is too clear, perhaps they could do with using some sort of dye?
Quote from: invercloy on January 15, 2012, 20:54
"...The idea of modelling part of ships moving behind a wall is definitely an interesting concept to pursue though..."
We had thoughts of doing something similar on Happisburgh once, using a wire on an endless loop between two pulleys with trolley poles soldered to it to simulate trams. The pulleys were to be hidden behind two buildings and the poles would be seen passing the gap between the buildings! OK, that's enough drift - let's get back to the water. A Faller road system under a sheet of acrylic sounds very plausible so long as the drive for the boats can be geared down a bit!
And yes, a bit of dye in the water would work nicely! I seem to recall the water just north of Harecastle Tunnel in Staffordshire is orange due to the iron. Perversely, the water on some parts of the Dudley Canal in the heart of the Black Country is crystal clear! Presumably because it's on a high level and has been filtered through the rock.
Quote from: Hobby on January 15, 2012, 21:03
Very impressive! My only issue is that the water is too clear, perhaps they could do with using some sort of dye?
Absolutely, but then it gets tricky, as technically only the deeper sections would need the dye, so you'd have to look at the specific gravity of the different fluids to do it 100% properly.
I'll stick with plaster, but I'll be interested to see what Rhobat does.
Thanks for all those comments. I think I've decided that, whether I use real water or some other method, the layout will be better off with the harbour to the rear of the layout rather than the front. The other advantage is that it is much easier to camouflage the entrance and exit of ships at the rear of the layout, using landscape features for example, than it would be at the front. In the meantime, the first step is to re-draw the trackplan of the layout to reflect this new aim.