SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
Hey Guys,
The SRDesign shops (aka: My Layout Room) have been over-run with work lately! Ray is one of many people that contacted me inside a week and requested my work. Being the guy i am, i happily accepted the challenge and set to work designing a layout for Ray, given the list of specs he wanted, and using a little creative license where needed to get the job done.
The funds for payment of this design arrived today, so Ray is about to recieve the bare file in his Inbox, while the finished graphic design is posted here.
The layout is 240cm by 215cm. I converted it all to the 'right' system of measure and set to work. I hope i've lived up to Ray's expectations, and have delivered a plan in which he can be happy with and enjoy building and working with for the next few years. Appologies for the large image size. It's easier to see when it's this big.
Comments? Suggestions? Opinions?
AR
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
Hello AR
Ray's design looks great. I'm looking forward to seeing the design you are working on for me.
The construction of the room addition is in it's final week and next week will be cleanup. Then I'll post some additional Pic of the finished addition. The rest of the house remodeling will be completed by EOM and first week of July I'll start the benchwork.
Folks AR was kind enough to allow me to make Benchwork changes two weeks into his design work. He's a gentleman and a scholar.
Or is it a good judge of bad liquor or a bad judge of good liquor. :) :lol:
Thanks
Ron
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
OK, maybe this is just the engineer in me (being picky), but if you've got 1" height between levels, and the length of track to make that transition is different (longer main-1", and shorter 3"-4"), surely they can not all be at a 2% grade (assuming 1"-2", and 2"-3", are 2%)...
Other than a tight pinch to get from 3"-4", the use of space is good...
Maybe you could radius the top end of the 1" to the right, to follow the terrain contour (end it just past/over the tunnel portal), allowing the 3" track to be drawn around the corner similarly... this means the distance of the 3"-4" is longer, reducing it's grade...
--
Bryan
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
Question
I'm new to MRR but regardless of the listed grades, If you lay the track according to the elevations won't that determine the final grade level?
I don't usually look at the details of grade/elevation, just the design of the track layout and if I like it or not. Is that a no no or what?
Thanks
Ron
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
Bryan,
Very good :P
Your right, the tracks are not all 2%. The 3"-4" rise is more like 2.3, and the longer of the tracks is something like 1.85%, but none the less, i listed them at 2% as thats how they should be built. It's an easy grade to lay, and saves me listing 4 different grade colours instead of the single one i have listed. They won't all be exactly an inch between levels, but seeing as there are no bridges or clearences to worry about, i wasn't too concerned about it.
Ron,
Yeah, ulitmatly, the ground determines the grade. However, in this instance, the number of the grade should determine the ground. By which i mean, it'll be easier to establish the grade at 2% and build the ground up to it then it would be to build the track at 1.85% and build the grade to fit the ground.
Make sense?
Thanks for the opinions, guys, and thanks to Ron for the friendly words :D
AR
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
siderod wrote:
A'rew, I'll apply that comment to the idea of making the zig-zag follow the terrain contour :P
Since that seems like it might be prototypical... the grade would be cut as a ledge that followed the terrain (least earthworks)... this give the ascending tracks more curves... the 4" being on a plateau could remain straight...Bryan, Very good :P
--
Bryan
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
Bryan,
That Very good was actually directed, sarcastically, at your grade comments. But, i gather you knew that. No matter.
Making the 1"-high track follow the terrain could work, yes. The way it's set up now, it runs into a large hill and stops. It could easly be cut into the mountain, but since it's not so short so as to cut into the operation of the switchbacks, i didn't see a reason.
Unless you can change my mind...
AR
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
siderod wrote:
Yup, I just applied it differently, for your sake ;-)
Bryan, That Very good was actually directed, sarcastically, at your grade comments. But, i gather you knew that...
siderod wrote:
Now why would I want to do that? :roll:...Unless you can change my mind...
--
Bryan
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
HI AR
I LOVE IT......thanks a lot. I would NEVER have come up with something like that myself. Not knowing much about logging etc I take it that the "ladder" on the left hand side that requires Trains to move up the gradient by forward then reverse is pretty common in the US? ( I think that bit of the design is Brill as the operating potential is just Great)
I just need to build it now and I am REALLY looking foward to that.
Thanks again, great Job I am delighted
Ray G
Re:SRDesign - A Layout for Ray
Ray,
Thanks :D
You are correct, that "Ladder" is known as switchbacks, and arn't exclusive to the US. They had some in the blue mountains of Australia, too, before they bored a new tunnel to make things easier. There are examples in the US, as well...Cass Scenic comes to mind.
I'm really thrilled that you like the plan!
Cheers
AR
Joined: 2004-06-05