ONLINE
STORE
"ASK THE BACH MAN"
FORUM
PARTS, SERVICE,
& INFORMATION
CATALOGS AND
BROCHURES

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 14, 2019, 03:06:23 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Please read the Forum Code of Conduct   >>Click Here <<
+  Bachmann Message Board
|-+  Discussion Boards
| |-+  HO
| | |-+  New Layout
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: New Layout  (Read 9885 times)
rogertra


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 19, 2014, 01:01:27 AM »

Just wanted to post an update. The table is finished and I've setup a small layout to test track and such. Waiting on UPS to bring me my darned switches!!!

The finished table sand track. It is a bit higher than I'd like it. Gonna take it down a foot or so this weekend.



No!  Don't!

Leave at whatever height that is.   The last thing you want is the top of your roadbed to be the height of a typical table.  That's waaaay too low.

From the photos and judging by the bookshelves in the background it's around 48".  Almost the perfect height.   Tabletop height is too low to be a comfortable work height and 48" is a comfortable viewing height.  Read the model railroad magazines and you'll see what I'm saying is the general opinion.

One comment.  You look as though you need to put some sway bracing on the legs to stop the table from swaying side to side and back and forth.

Cheers

Roger T.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2014, 03:15:32 AM by rogertra » Logged

Doneldon

View Profile
« Reply #16 on: June 19, 2014, 01:53:24 AM »

Striker-

Don't lower your table until you work with it for a while. One of the most common mistakes new modelers make is having their tracks too low. Higher bench work -- along the order of 45"-54" -- is much easier to work both under and on. Also, our railroads look better, generally, and more real when viewed from a more eye level than bird's eye perspective. It is easy to lower a layout after construction than to add height, especially if you want a sturdy railroad. Plus, a higher layout is protected from the littlest engineers who want to play trains when the foreman is at his other (real) job. Getting them up on a stool or high chair is a snap when there is an adult around to supervise them.

Your carpentry skills look very good. Everything seems to be straight, plumb and level. However, I strongly encourage you to add some diagonal braces to make things more solid and to reduce the shaking when someone bumps the table. And that will happen ... often. A single brace on both sides and both ends will do the trick. Run them from as high as possible on one leg to near the bottom of the second leg. It's a bit stronger if the slants on parallel sides are not parallel themselves. That is, go from the top of the left leg on the near side of the layout to the low end of the right leg on the near side of the layout, but run the brace from the bottom of the left leg on the far side to the high spot on the right leg on the far side.

I hope this helps.
Logged
rogertra


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 19, 2014, 03:17:58 AM »



Yes do as Doneldon suggests as he's repeated what I wrote but with more and better details and reasons.

And if Doneldon suggests the same things I do, then I must be on the right track.  :-)

Cheers

Roger T.


Logged

Catt

View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 19, 2014, 06:33:44 AM »

Here's another vote for leaving the table at the height it is.You will be glad you did in the end.If you lower the table you will have to bend over to work on it and that posture gets old real quick no matter what your age is.
Logged
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #19 on: June 19, 2014, 07:10:02 AM »

Striker, what is the height it is at now?  A good friend of mine suggested making the legs at least 36".  A great suggestion and I even made them a little taller on our new layout.  Of course, the taller you are, the higher you may want your table.  It is much easier to work under a higher table than a lower one.

It looks great! 
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
rogertra


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: June 19, 2014, 09:01:09 AM »

Striker, what is the height it is at now?  A good friend of mine suggested making the legs at least 36".  A great suggestion and I even made them a little taller on our new layout.  Of course, the taller you are, the higher you may want your table.  It is much easier to work under a higher table than a lower one.

It looks great! 

Sorry but 36" is still way too low for a comfortable working height for your average adult.

You're much better off with the top of the bench work being around 48 inches or even more.

Cheers

Roger T.
Logged

jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: June 19, 2014, 10:46:08 AM »

No need to be sorry old boy, that height works very well for me and my son thank you.

What's your definition of "average"?
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Striker1945

View Profile
« Reply #22 on: June 19, 2014, 10:50:42 AM »

Roger- OK I WONT! =)

I cut the table legs to three feet. The legs fold inward so I can collapse the table if I like and that adds about 3-5 inches so the table sits around 42" when all is said and done.

Doneldon- As for the swaybraces, I'm cutting the two 8ft sidebeams down today to place them inbetween the table legs. I found out that this table sways a bit when bumped as I bumped it myself when placing track. I also need to move it out from the wall another 6 inches so I can fit back there incase anything derails. in that far corner.


Thanks for your comments guys. I really do appreciate all your wisdom!!!

-Striker
Logged
Striker1945

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2014, 10:08:50 PM »

So I've been spending a good amount of time on Anyrail altering my original track plan.

What do you guys think?
Logged
Doneldon

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: June 19, 2014, 11:58:11 PM »

Striker-

I like it but I do have a few suggestions. First, cant your tracks so you don't have straightaways running parallel to the edges of your layout. It's amazing how much of a difference even almost parallel tracks can make. Also, plan to operate in a mainly counterclockwise direction. That will allow you to move trains between both loops without backing up. Last, unless you have plans to put a city or a mountain or something in the middle, you can put in a switchback to put industries (read, switching opportunities) there. You can even use switchbacks from both sides so you have an empties-in-loads-out configuration. In any event, think about the possibility of running a view block through the middle of your pike. It can add operational possibilities and make your layout seem much larger. That's because it makes it impossible to see the whole layout (and the trains running around in a circle) with a single glance.
                                                                                                -- D
« Last Edit: June 20, 2014, 10:05:06 PM by Doneldon » Logged
jward


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: June 20, 2014, 08:39:41 AM »

i like the new design. you've eliminated all the s curve problems, gone to 18r minimum curves, and numbered switches as well. this shouold operate much better than the original design.

when considering table height, i've found 48" too high to be comfortable. sure you can get under the table to work on wiring easier, but you have to stand up to see the trains. i prefer to sit when running, so i've found 36" to be a better choice for me. the current layout was built at 48" because it had to fit over bookshelves and a dog cage due to lack of room. it is awkward to run, and hard to reach into certain areas as well. lowering it at least 6 inches would cure most of these problems, but for me that's not possible.

if you're comfortable with 36" legs l;eave them as they are. just because some magazine tells you to do something a certain way doesn't mean you have to do it that way.
Logged

Jeffery S Ward Sr
Pittsburgh, PA
Striker1945

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: June 20, 2014, 09:32:49 AM »

Doneldon- I had planned to run trains CCW, but your comment reinforces my thought.

In regards to the switchback I've looked online and am still a bit unsure as to their purpose; more explanation is definitely needed. Furthermore the switchbacks or zig-zags (as I also saw/heard them called) seem to take up more room than I have available so why would I want to use them here?

I've also given some thought to the scene divide; I saw it for the first time when I picked up my first copy of MR magazine Freshman year of college. For this board I do have a city of sorts planned for the center and am gonna keep it that way for this layout.

jward-   As I've futzed around (technical term Wink ) with my board I've become accustomed to the height. Works well for me though, as previously mentioned, that back corner is a wee bit tricky to access sometimes. And as a history MA student I don't always agree or adhere to the thoughts or musings of a given book or magazine  Grin
Logged
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: June 20, 2014, 10:14:04 AM »

Always nice to meet a fellow History Major.
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
jward


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: June 20, 2014, 11:37:52 AM »

switchbacks were usually used where there wasn't room for a line to loop back on itself. they were pretty rare and usually short lived on mainline railroads, becuase negotiating them was time consuming and restricted train size. as far as i know, only one still survives in the us for use by a mainline railroad, the former l&n now csx at Hagans, Va. negotiation it requires the train to be cut in half, and taken through the switchbacks one section at a time, and reassembled on the other side.

switchbacks are also used in industrial sidings where space is at a premium, or other factors preclude a direct entry to the industry being served.
Logged

Jeffery S Ward Sr
Pittsburgh, PA
Doneldon

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: June 20, 2014, 10:09:13 PM »

Always nice to meet a fellow History Major.

Jim-

Seriously? That was one of my undergraduate majors, too. Somehow I graduated with three, one of which didn't go
anywhere, one of which led to grad school and a career and one of which just remained a strong avocation. That was
history.
                  -- D
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!