Less sticky subject

[B.Meldon]

A possible alternative far cheaper duel gauge track is to do as we have done and use Peco 00 flex track.
We remove the central section of every other sleeper.
Cut the sleepers out of a second section of track and then use this as the central rail.
You have to cut the sleepers at the correct length and have a transition section between this and the 009 track as the rail section is larger, but you do end up with two one yard sections of duel gauge track for the cost of three normal one yard sections of Peco 00 flexi track.
In our case we always pin the sleepers down to a

[Stefan Krebs]

Just slightly off topic:

How did you design and built you check-rails?   ???

I have the dual-gauge 3-rail track, and I want to run it across a bridge like you do. But so far any attempts at check-rail look bad, 6 rails side by side just looks weird.   ::)

And a bridge without check-rails looks even weirder...   ::)

Any thoughts? And Brian, your solution is probably not going to work with check-rails, isn't it?   :laugh:

Back to the topic: kiddie's craft glue is the answer, assuming both, your bridge and your track are not water-soluble. Those glues are designed to be washed out of hair and clothes should the little tykes decide for some more adventurous and crafty gluing experiments.   ;D

Good luck
Waldschrat

[B.Meldon]

Interesting problem Waldschrat.

Firstly, do you have any photos of a prototype duel-gauge bridge?
If so how is done?

If not perhaps only two check-rails are needed?
In theory the outer standard gauge rail would act like a check rail preventing a de-railed NG vehicle from straying outside the standard gauge. So perhaps only two check rails are needed outside the outer standard gauge rails?

As it happens Peco 00 track is very handy when it comes to adding checkrails. Because of the way it is made by placing a rail section direct on the sleepers it is very slightly lower than the running rail in the chairs. If you wanted it to be secured, other than using glue, you could solder brass pins on the underside of the rail spaced so they are in between the sleepers then secure them down into the

[Stefan Krebs]

Dear Brian,

No, I haven't been at a dual-gauge bridge, so I haven't got photos; and I can't find anything on the Internet.

But the problem is one the prototype does not have:
On the shared rail I have to gap for H0- and N-gauge flanges, which means the gap is wider than on the centre rail. It should really be same width on all 3 rails. That uneven gapping makes it look sh...  ::)

The other problem I'm mulling is, whether to build 3-rail 3-gauges, or 4-rail dual gauge. With 1mm railhead width I could run H0, H0e, and H0i on 3 rails. But I want to run transporter wagons, so I need to check first if my clearance between girders is sufficient to accommodate the 5mm offset of the centre lines between H0e and H0. If it isn't I have to install 4-rail dual gauge track.   ;D
In which case a 2nd bridge will be required for the H0i track.  :'(

Of course I could go for all underslung girders, but I have eye-balled the railway bridge at Savonlinna (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Olavinlinna_from_air_pre-1962.jpg), which was combined road-rail bridge when I was there (I think it isn't anymore).

Thus, issue no3 is that the check-rails have to be part of a road surface (wood blanks), and the flangeway can't be too wide.    :laugh: :laugh:

I know, I know, if you haven't got any problems you make yourself some.   ::)

Cheers
Waldschrat

[B.Meldon]

I agree I can not find any photos of duel gauge track on a bridge with check rails. On the other hand there are several photos of duel gauge track on bridges with no check rails at all.

So perhaps because of that they are not necessary and you do not need to bother with them. If you did not have any I seriously doubt that anyone could say with any authority that you have made an error!

Here is an example with no check rails at all, the strips outside the running rails are wood.:



I also agree about the differences in flange gaps in model form between 00/H0 and 009/H0e.  

Sadly there is only one way to avoid this issue and that is to only use fine scale wheel flanges on all you standard gauge 00/H0 items, that way you can make all the flange gaps the same size.

However this was not something we wanted to do with our duel gauge layout simply because of the great number of H0 and 00 items we wanted to run. So we opted for another option and just planned the layout so that there were no duel gauge flange gaps!
This option included duel gauge points and the way we did that was to make them all with stub point type moving frogs. At the time we thought that this was not prototypical at all, but since then I have seen examples in eastern Europe.

Here is a photo of the duel gauge point (set to the 009) with the moving stub point type frog. It is all hand made with 00 rail and was built on a separate section of 1/4 (6mm) plywood that was then inserted into the layout when finished. Both the frog and the blade are linked to the point motor. The check rails serve no function and are just there for looks, they are both set to 00 flange gaps. (This photo was taken mid way through doing the scenery in this part of the layout and flat area on the left is now occupied with a good shed and goods platform.)



Obviously this works very well indeed as there is an unbroken running rail when switched to 009 or 00. That was our main priority, faultless running, not prototypical accuracy.
Also note another 00 to 009 rail joint without a fishplate in the lower right corner on the photo as mentioned in another thread.

Brian Meldon

[B.Meldon]

In regards to the 3 or 4 rail duel gauge track I recommend 3 rail with a 3,75mm offset in the standard gauge rail on the bridge.
This should give clearance for the standard gauge and the transporter wagons. However by their nature standard gauge vehicles on transporter wagons are taller than when on the standard gauge track.
Again we cheated in this regard and only used standard gauge wagons with lower roof heights! But on our layout these are permanently fixed to the Liliput transporter wagons that are also modified with four wheel free running bogies rather than the six wheel bogies that we found did not run freely at all.

Brian Meldon

[Stefan Krebs]

Dear Brian,

Some food for thought...; and an interesting picture.   :laugh:

I have the functionally same switch, i.e. threading the narrow gauge into the standard gauge, in 2 versions:
1. From the days of the GDR with one single moving switch blade that 'turns out' the narrow gauge, i.e. is off the shared rail for the narrow gauge to curve away, and buttons up to the shared rail for the standard gauge to go straight on. Essentially the same as yours, but with the 'classic' frog.
2. The Tillig version, which has no moving parts.

Both are build to NEM standards, and moving to RP25 is something I contemplate, which will require shimming of the flangeways. I always get irate when the flangeway is wide enough for my model car tyres to drop in.    ;D

While I have seen stub-switches, I have not seen one with a big switch-blade like yours. If you have some snow there'll be a lot to shovel.   ;D

I wonder where that bridge is, with no board walk you don't want a passenger train break down on it...; no way of getting off the train?    ???

This is where I have a problem with prototypes: while I severely 'free-lance' I like to keep things credible, i.e. in Europe we have check rails and walkways on bridges, but not fire buckets and step-outs as they have in America. I feel these little details are scene-setters, i.e. place a layout into a certain region and period. Like your stub-switch frog, which 'pushes' your layout towards 19th century or Eastern Europe. Stub-switches (or frog-less points) were in use in Germany, both GDR and FRG, into the 1980s, but only on industrial narrow gauge.

Those batons on the sleeper edge I have seen before, but I haven't worked out their purpose yet? Any idea.   ???


Thanks
Waldschrat

[clayliner]

That's a fascinating point, Brian, and beautifully executed.

One thing I'm wondering is: how is the movement of the point blade checked? - how do you ensure that it moves to the correct position, but no further? I presume that there are some stops out of sight, beneath the baseboard.

David.

[Stefan Krebs]

Dear Brian,

Just found a similar picture, but spot the differences:
1. Check-rail.
2. Board walk.

I'm cheating, and I didn't klick, even though I travelled across that bridge.   :-[
The cheat is that the inner rails are standard gauge, and the outer rails Finnish broad gauge, i.e. no 'narrow' gauge (which is why I didn't klick, I was mentally on narrow gauge).   ;D Which locates this bridge precisely as the one in Haparanda on the Swedish - Finnish boarder.

Noteworthy, no check-rails on the outer rails, i.e. the standard gauge rails are considered check-rails for the broad gauge, despite the fairly wide gap. Maybe I should really go for 4-rail dual-gauge with check-rails only on the narrow gauge?   ???

Importantly, this is a common carrier bridge with passenger traffic, hence the board walks.

Cheers
Waldschrat

[duttonbay]

Dear Brian,

Just found a similar picture, but spot the differences:
1. Check-rail.
2. Board walk.

I'm cheating, and I didn't klick, even though I travelled across that bridge.   :-[
The cheat is that the inner rails are standard gauge, and the outer rails Finnish broad gauge, i.e. no 'narrow' gauge (which is why I didn't klick, I was mentally on narrow gauge).   ;D Which locates this bridge precisely as the one in Happaranta on the Swedish - Finnish boarder.

Noteworthy, no check-rails on the outer rails, i.e. the standard gauge rails are considered check-rails for the broad gauge, despite the fairly wide gap. Maybe I should really go for 4-rail dual-gauge with check-rails only on the narrow gauge?   ???

Importantly, this is a common carrier bridge with passenger traffic, hence the board walks.

Cheers
Waldschrat

I believe Finland uses 5' gauge, so the difference between SG and BG would be only 3

[Stefan Krebs]

You could well be right, on closer inspection the gap between the left 2 rails seems to be slightly wider than that between the right 2 rails; and with 85mm difference in gauge standard gauge won't fit in between the broad gauge.

Just had a look, on a Swedish blog it says gauntlet track, so you're right.

Just to show that you're right, here is the 'lace-up' of the gauntlet track in Haparanda. The 'over-swing' is to avoid problems at the point, otherwise the angle would be too acute causing an increased risk of derailment.

Thanks for pointing out my mistake!   :laugh:

On the other hand than it is a point in case for Brian' suggestion: check-rails only on the inner rails.   ;D


Cheers
Waldschrat

[Stefan Krebs]

.. and the other direction, photo by Falk2.

[clayliner]

When I wrote my post yesterday I was trying to think where else I'd recently seen a photo of a similar stub point. It was in this month's News, of course - on page 14.

Incidentally, the term 'stub point' covers more than one configuration of pointwork.

David.

P.S.  Some nice photos there of gauntletted track!

[Stefan Krebs]

David, of course, 'stub point' can have various configuration, and probably I wasn't accurate using the term at all. I'm running out of English language here, but what I really meant was the movable 'frog rail', as opposed to a frog piece without moving parts. Technically that's no peculiarity of stub points, but can be found on switches with switch blades too.   :laugh:


Cheers
Waldschrat

[B.Meldon]

That's a fascinating point, Brian, and beautifully executed.

One thing I'm wondering is: how is the movement of the point blade checked? - how do you ensure that it moves to the correct position, but no further? I presume that there are some stops out of sight, beneath the baseboard.

David.

The point blade is attached directly to the solunoid point motor and the position of this is adjustable.

Yes there are also stops on the underside and the very simple mechanisum for the movinhg frog has some adjustment built in if needed as well.
But since it was installed I have never had to adjust it.

Brian Meldon