An Inglenook

[Derek Clark]

I have decided to make an OO9 start with an Inglenook.
My reasoning is that it will give me practise in making a small baseboard, laying track, wire in tube point work, basic DC electrics, wagon and loco building from kits and setting Greenwich couplings. All good skills to have on tap for the Proper Layout! There is a lot of learning there but I hope to achieve a good standard.

The baseboard is from 36" by 8" of 6mm ply which had a bend in it. It probably still has a bend in it but I have thwarted its desire to propel my stock either to the middle of the board or off the ends by making a frame. 
I made a 2" by 1" frame (because there was a length of that in the garage) but only 6' long. The end cross pieces are 9mm ply. I don't like to use screws into end grain but I couldn't find my dowelling kit so I fastened the ply ends by screws into the end grain.
I used 25mm brassed brads and PVA glue to hold the top to the frame. The PVA was a bit lumpy so it was probably for the best that I couldn't find the dowels. There are plenty of brads.
The baseboard weighs about as much as an equivalent section of a Brunel bridge.
Not the sort of standard I was hoping to achieve but I blame covid.

[Hugh Norwood]

Please keep us posted with your progress.

[Derek Clark]

My baseboard is complete and the track is laid.
I had a choice of a pair of dead frog or a pair of live frog points for this Inglenook. I decided on live frog and without wiring the frog because it is going to be easy to clean this small outfit. The points are new but the track is very old N gauge Peco flexitrack. (My new OO9 track was stuck in a Postal Sorting Office for a fortnight). After the the attentions of meths (spirits not crystal) and a Peco track rubber, it was laid and a buzzer showed good continuity.
I soldered a 'proper' six pin plug top onto the secondhand Gaugemaster W wires and mounted the corresponding socket in a 16mm hole drilled through the front 2 by 1 of the baseboard frame. I was a TV engineer in the 1970's and had a lot of soldering practice because we worked to component level in the field in those olden days. I chose to use my Antex 15W iron and realising that it must be about 50 years old I gave it a new tip. What with it being a celebration I had a piece of cake.
I have noticed that when soldering is mentioned in association with OO9 the use of flux is often suggested. Cored solder is a lot less messy to use but, besides wiring, is it not up to the usual OO9 jobs?

My only loco is a 3D printed Sentinel which I haven't done anything to as yet. I bought it on eBay from MD Models and I was pleasantly surprised how crisp the detail is. I squeezed it on my Kato 109 motor as a temporary measure and placed it on the track. I applied power and nothing happened although the red light on the W was showing as the knob was turned. The motor failed to move whether the direction switch was at F or R. Applying the first action of a 1970's TV repairman I gave the suspect component (the Kato 109) a smack, and away it went. God knows what the problem was but it moved back and forth very nicely for several tests of points, track and controller.
It was running the wrong way and the guide for the controller suggests reversing the DC output connections. At the track end mine are moulded in by Peco and at the six pin socket end it would have meant getting it out of the 2 by 1. I turned the loco body on the Kato 109 and it now runs correctly.  :)

Onward and upward, and I will be building stock next. I have five rtr wagons and one part built 'present to new members' kit plus a part built Dundas brakevan. The latter two need finishing off and I have a choice for the other two kits to make the eight for the puzzle.

[Graeme Dunbar]

I have soldered to rails using only cored solder and no extra flux but it is not something I would want do as a matter of course. If the rail is clean it can work but where there is the possibility of heat damage (sleepers melt readily) it is good policy to solder as quickly as possible. I have a small jar of colophony/rosin dissolved in IPA as extra flux. A small drop applied using the end of solder is often all that is needed. It is especially useful for re-flowing solder after tinning and either sweating the joint or adding more solder.

Another useful unaggressive flux that is useful is the 'no clean' spray flux for electronics use that can again be applied with something like a toothpick or small brush. One of these days I might get around to trying some other mild-sh home-made fluxes such as citric acid.

I imagine the advantage is that the flux is activated on the surface as soon as heat is applied rather than heating the joint, applying the cored solder and waiting the moment for the flux in it to melt and flow over the joint.

A marked difference between soldering electronics and other things is that in general the component leads and circuit boards are pre-tinned. Soldering some electronic or electro-mechanical components such as larger connectors (jack, barrel etc.) and switches which have a shiny metal plating is made easier using pre-applied flux.

[Stephen Rainsbury]

I had a choice of a pair of dead frog or a pair of live frog points for this Inglenook. I decided on live frog and without wiring the frog because it is going to be easy to clean this small outfit.

Hi Derek, god to hear that you are building an inglenook, its a good project and you are right it is a good place to practice new techniques.
I am a bit confused when to say live frog without wiring, does that mean you are are just going to connect them with track joiners?

The points are new but the track is very old N gauge Peco flexitrack. (My new OO9 track was stuck in a Postal Sorting Office for a fortnight). After the the attentions of meths (spirits not crystal) and a Peco track rubber, it was laid and a buzzer showed good continuity.

T-Cut can be very good for cleaning older slightly oxidised track, and leaves a nice smooth surface which is less likely to corrode in future.

.
I have noticed that when soldering is mentioned in association with OO9 the use of flux is often suggested. Cored solder is a lot less messy to use but, besides wiring, is it not up to the usual OO9 jobs?

I was an engineer for 2 years too and only ever used multicore solder. I bought some flux last year for making up a metal kit, and it certainly helped, and I will probably use it for larger areas, such as soldering track to PCB as the heat certainly seems to travel faster and more evenly, but I don't use it for normal wiring, so long as both surfaces are nice and clean.

[Graeme Dunbar]

I was an engineer for 2 years too and only ever used multicore solder. I bought some flux last year for making up a metal kit, and it certainly helped, and I will probably use it for larger areas, such as soldering track to PCB as the heat certainly seems to travel faster and more evenly, but I don't use it for normal wiring, so long as both surfaces are nice and clean.

I think flux is essential for soldering larger areas such as metal kits or even PCB sleepers. The area or volume of copper sleeper being soldered is larger than all but the largest PCB pads and more akin to soldering to ground planes, and there there is usually thermal relief in the form of an isolated pad joined to the ground plane by thin tracks.

Flux also seems to have a greater effect on the behaviour of the joint than the type of solder (the typical solders of varying temperature ranges used in brass kit construction - very low temperature whitemetal solders excepted.) Standard electronics solders make nice 'Mount Fuji' type joints, but I found using something fairly aggressive like Fry's Powerflow Flux it can flow over the surface (exaggerating somewhat) like oil on water producing a thin tinned layer.

With appropriate skill (that I don't have) it is possible to make use of differing behaviour to produce either almost invisible flat-bottom rail joints representing spiked construction to PCB joint-like  meniscuses approximating bullhead chairs.

[Derek Clark]

I am a bit confused when to say live frog without wiring, does that mean you are are just going to connect them with track joiners?

T-Cut can be very good for cleaning older slightly oxidised track, and leaves a nice smooth surface which is less likely to corrode in future.

I was an engineer for 2 years too and only ever used multicore solder. I bought some flux last year for making up a metal kit, and it certainly helped, and I will probably use it for larger areas, such as soldering track to PCB as the heat certainly seems to travel faster and more evenly, but I don't use it for normal wiring, so long as both surfaces are nice and clean.

Yes, just the track joiners, but I have pinched them on tight. I read a suggestion that a wire should be taken from the frog to a linked switched to avoid relying on the contact given by blades.

Thanks for the T Cut tip.

I have used flux in the past on large hard to clean surfaces. I don't expect to be making white metal kits any time soon and I'll probably use super glue gel when I do  :)

[Graeme Dunbar]

I found this video helpful in showing wiring up of Peco Electrofrog turnouts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et3vuedbZ98

It takes each step slowly and clearly and covers both use of the turnouts out of the box using the switch blades to make electrical contact and modified using a separate frog switch.

Perhaps a couple of points to add -

- when used in the unmodified form there is perhaps a slight chance wheel backs shorting against the points/switch rails as can be seen from the narrow gap in the diagrams shown. It's probably not an issue but a minor derailment might cause a short. In the modified form it does not matter if a wheel bridges the gap between the point blade and its stock rail.

- The bonding wires shown in the modification can be used for connection to the frog switch by extending them below the baseboard rather that soldering the frog switch wires to the rail joiners at the toe end.

[Stephen Rainsbury]

Yes, just the track joiners, but I have pinched them on tight. I read a suggestion that a wire should be taken from the frog to a linked switched to avoid relying on the contact given by blades.

If your frog is connected to track on both sides won't it short circuit the two sides of the track?

[Derek Clark]

Yes, just the track joiners, but I have pinched them on tight. I read a suggestion that a wire should be taken from the frog to a linked switched to avoid relying on the contact given by blades.

If your frog is connected to track on both sides won't it short circuit the two sides of the track?

I think you switch the wire to the frog so it reinforces the contact made by the point blade but I'd expect/hope others here have experience of the circuitry. It just seemed a little too much for two points and a short board.

Oops! I see that GraemeD has already pointed out a YouTube vid that explains. Thanks Graeme.

[Hugh Norwood]

It was running the wrong way and the guide for the controller suggests reversing the DC output connections. At the track end mine are moulded in by Peco and at the six pin socket end it would have meant getting it out of the 2 by 1. I turned the loco body on the Kato 109 and it now runs correctly.  :)

I'm a tad puzzled by this comment. In general a loco will go "forward" when the right-hand ("starboard") side is positive. If you pick up the loco and put it down on the track again without changing anything else, it will go in the same direction (but since it is facing the other way it will be backwards)

If you change the orientation of the chassis (not something you can do on most locos, of course) it will still go forwards if the right hand side is positive.

As far as I am aware the only chassis that go "backwards" when the right hand side is positive were some of the old Egger ones. (Others may comment on this).

The F and R on your controller do not really have any relevance as it is up to you how you connect the wires to your tracks... (they should more correctly be labelled "One way" and "The other way" perhaps!)

:)

[Derek Clark]

I'm a tad puzzled by this comment.

The F and R on your controller do not really have any relevance as it is up to you how you connect the wires to your tracks... (they should more correctly be labelled "One way" and "The other way" perhaps!)

:)

I'm puzzled and I wrote it!

I have just tried to replicate what I did. As far as I can tell I have settled for F on the controller being Forward with the locomotive facing the way I want to be the front. That, however, resulted in the loco moving across the board Left to Right rather than the Right to Left I thought I wanted.

I'm not sure I understand what I am on about either but I may have moved from tad to completely puzzled. :)

[Hugh Norwood]

I'd try not to worry about it - as I said "F" and "R" don't really mean anything....

The important thing is that all your locos (what! you only have the one? - it's only a matter of time) go in the same direction when your controller is set to "F"

[Derek Clark]

The important thing is that all your locos (what! you only have the one? - it's only a matter of time) go in the same direction when your controller is set to "F"

Hmm, I can see that would cause a problem ;D

[Graeme Dunbar]

With DC control one way of approaching it is to think in railway terms 'up' and 'down', East and West, left and right, clockwise and anticlockwise or whatever makes sense in the context of the layout, for it is the layout that is being 'controlled' not the locomotive.

It would perhaps make sense that when operating the layout from the normal operating side that trains move in the direction the controller knob is turned (if it is centre-off type) or the direction the direction switch is set if it is of that type.

Forward and reverse with regards to the direction the locomotive is pointing only really applies in DCC. Even then I'm not sure it really helps to think in terms of the locomotive because unless it is a tender engine, the direction the locomotive is pointing when it moves is not the key thing, it is the direction the train takes. Tank engines are generally not turned and run equally well in either direction.