|
Post by ztrack on Dec 30, 2015 23:25:01 GMT -5
Above shows how I use 1" pink foam, layered on a 1" x 4" frame. The foam has been contoured. The paints are artist acrylic paints. You can see one of the tubes on the right side of the layout. As for track plans, I have a 2' x 3' track plan coming up in the November/December issue of Ztrack. I am also working on a 2' x 8' track plan for an upcoming issue of Ztrack. The 2' x 8' theme is SP/UP Mikado and F3 operations with running PFE reefers as the base concept. I love the look of long trains winding through scenery. I am thinking this plan will run in the March/April or May/June issue of Ztrack. Rob
|
|
|
Post by dave on Dec 30, 2015 23:29:22 GMT -5
Rob and dazed, thanks for the input. Is there a reason that you are layering two 1" pieces of foam rather than using a single piece of 2" foam?
|
|
|
Post by ztrack on Dec 30, 2015 23:40:50 GMT -5
I personally like the 1". I have tried 2" and 1/2" but keep going back to the 1". It is easy to cut and work with. Also, 1" is sort of a perfect height separator for Z. For instance, in the scene I am showing. the double line main is exactly 1" above the road. The 1" gives enough room for the underpass. By the way, on my home layout, my main line is 4" above the frame base. I do this on purpose so I can model both above the main line, but also below. See this photo of another scene, Note the depth and layers of this scene. If you build on the frame, it is difficult to go below the main level. Rob
|
|
|
Post by dazed on Dec 31, 2015 1:20:27 GMT -5
Rob and dazed, thanks for the input. Is there a reason that you are layering two 1" pieces of foam rather than using a single piece of 2" foam? For me, it's a few things... 1. Size. The 2" is nice, and I'm sure somewhat more stable, but honestly the 1" laminated to 3/4" is really sufficient for what I'm doing. Add the extra 1/2" on top of that and there's no real reason to go with 2", especially given... 2. Price, as the 1" is about $13/sheet, versus about $50/sheet for the 2", and... 3. Availability is a big issue with the 2". I do have a local source, but it's not convenient to get to, more limited hours than Home Depot, etc. Also, the 1" let's me have more... 4. Flexibility with how I do the layout. To me, I like to have cavities cut in the lower layer of the stack for access to wiring, a place to stash decoders etc, then have a *mostly* solid piece on top of that to keep things sturdy and lined up correctly. So, to do that with 2" just makes the resulting stack that much thicker, and I'm doing my darnedest to keep it as thin, portable, and lightweight as possible. I will say, if there is any doubt about it being sturdy enough I would make the effort to go with 2" without hesitation. I just really didn't think it was needed in my case. I did initially attempt to get by with two 3/4 and two 1/2 layers even, but I didn't like the stability. The 1" made all the difference.
|
|
|
Post by rvn2001 on Dec 31, 2015 2:31:05 GMT -5
I use the 2" rigid pink foam from Home Depot. I rabbet a 1" groove all the way around the foam so that it sits recessed in the frame. 1" of the foam is above the top of the frame and 1" is below the top of the frame. That allows me to make scenery that goes below the top of the frame as deep as 2" if I want to. I have even added more foam to the bottom to make deeper cuts. I've done this on my trestle module and cut away some of the frame too so that the tracks at the top of the trestle are 3 + 3/4" from the bottom of the river that it crosses.
|
|
|
Post by atw on Dec 31, 2015 8:19:00 GMT -5
I think the "pink" insulation board is made from extruded polystyrene (XPS, also called Styrofoam) which has a much higher density (28–45 kg/m3) and is therefore much more rigid than EPS (expanded polystyrene, the "white insulation board"), which has a density of around 15 kg/m3. Personally, I use the latter, because it's a lot lighter in weight (it's effectively made up of 98% air) yet still rigid enough for a layout/module base once it's framed with 0.4" plywood boards - I have said goodbye to "bomb proof" heavyweight construction methods with timbers and all a long time ago, I prefer my modules to be well and truly portable (using lightweight construction and scenery methods also means no warping of any kind). In any case both XPS and EPS are great modelling materials (I find I use the 2" sheets most often).
cheerZ Adrian
|
|
|
Post by dazed on Dec 31, 2015 12:05:05 GMT -5
Yes, forgot to mention I use the pink or blue XPS.
For very small layouts such as Dave's and mine, I wouldn't use any framing. It just adds to the weight and the foam is plenty sturdy, especially once it is laminated to another layer.
There is also extra dense XPS and I would say worth the extra expense if you can find it, especially if you aren't using framing.
|
|
|
Post by catt on Jan 1, 2016 10:05:59 GMT -5
No longer relevant
|
|
|
Post by Commodore on Jan 6, 2016 17:27:11 GMT -5
I need to build a Test loop. I'm trying to accurately match loco pairs. My plan is to time several laps around the proposed loop and to average them, then to group the closest locos into pairs.
The new E 8/9 are strong runners and relatively close ...but this isn't horseshoes. I've got to have evenly match engines to pull a long string of cars without problem.
I've been mostly hand laying track ...and building my own switches to prevent derail and other issues ...so have no experience with Rokuhan. I just require a "standardized" loop to let them run.
The super elevated 270mm curve track sounds appropriate.
How about using the 13 degree 490mm track? Twelve pieces should make about a yard wide circle.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by markm on Jan 6, 2016 21:30:54 GMT -5
I use a 220mm oval of MTL roadbed track as my test bed. The rail height and curve radius is about worst case for me.
I would say you should try to get the test track to match your layout specs. Use the curve radius that is the smallest on you layout and s similar rail size. I don't think I'd use super elevated track unless that's on your layout. I'm afraid roadbed track isn't horseshoes as well. The 13 degree track doesn't make a decent circle on its own, although it's not hard to cut a section to length to finish the circle.
Hope this helps,
Mark
|
|
|
Post by Commodore on Jan 7, 2016 0:04:46 GMT -5
Thank you, Mark!
I was trying for speed with the super elevated circle format.
The 13 degree curvature was intended to take tracking issues (due to wheelbase) out of the equation.
I like your idea best.
Low speed / pulling equivalency is what I'm actually seeking to test for.
Thanks again!
|
|
|
Post by dave on Jan 18, 2016 23:12:07 GMT -5
I am going to get started on my flat layout. I have a piece of 2" pink foamboard from Home Depot and I have settled on a 32" X 60" piece. I chose the wider board because I want a double track mainline (270mm & 245mm) and I would like to have an S-curve front side (not a straight line that follows the edge). That width will also allow me to have a long 2 track yard on the back side. I am really waiting now for the Rokuhan double crossover for the backside of the layout.
|
|
|
Post by markm on Jan 19, 2016 17:31:36 GMT -5
Dave, Something to consider (if you haven't already) is that many residential doorways are just 32" wide. I pulled back from 32" to 30" on my layout for just that reason.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by dave on Jan 19, 2016 18:25:50 GMT -5
Mark, that is a good point, but I plan to glue everything down so I can tip it sideways when I need to move it.
Also, does anyone have any links to some layouts of about the same length with curved track on one long side?
|
|
|
Post by rvn2001 on Jan 20, 2016 19:19:33 GMT -5
These are pictures of my, now defunct, ZBT yard module. It was 30 inches wide by 5+1/2 feet long. It has a sweeping curve along the long side. The tracks end up being parallel to the edge because they need to be able to connect with other modules.
|
|