More fun With Code 40 Rail

[ednadolski]

I've been thinking about ways to build modern concrete tie track using code 40 rail.   Recently I discovered that the 2mm Association makes PCB ties that are milled to the profile of concrete ties.  While you have to be an Association member to purchase the products, I was able to obtain a small sample of ties (thanks Nigel!) that I could use to build a short length of test track representing a North American prototype mainline.  So here are some pictures, along with some notes and observations:

 - With PCB ties, there is no practical way to represent the Pandrol rail clips, which are of course a pretty distinctive feature on the prototype.  When compared to Micro Engineering Code 55 concrete tie flextrack, the core tradeoff is: hand-built track with finescale rail that is missing the clips, vs. commercial track with oversized rail and oversized clips.  It is possible to weather the track so that the absence of the clips is less noticeable; just as weathering can also make the oversized clips less noticeable.  To my eye however, weathering cannot disguise the oversized C55 rail (even taking the extra step of grinding the railhead to a more narrow profile).  The hand-built track is of course also more time-consuming.  So making a choice between these tradeoffs is inherently subjective and a matter of personal preferences.

 - Construction is basically a matter of laying down the ties and soldering the rail into place.  In this sample I soldered every 5th tie, and the result is quite sturdy.  I positioned the ties by hand, on scale 24" centers, so you can see some irregularities if you look closely.  It would be preferable to have some sort of jig to hold the ties and rail in the proper alignment.  In that case, I would consider a method that would (a) solder one rail onto every tie in the jig, (b) position and glue the track in place on the layout like flextrack, and then (c) position the second rail with gauges and solder it into place.  The second rail need not solder to every tie.  For tangent track, both rails could be soldered in place on the jig.

 - I hand-painted everything on this sample, but for a layout I would prefer to airbrush everything a base concrete gray color, then mask off the ties with tape and airbrush the rails a proper rail color.  For this sample, I made a custom concrete color from (roughly) equal parts of Polly Scale Reefer White, Aged White, and Undercoat Light Gray.   The rail color is a mix of PolyScale Railroad Tie Brown and Pacemaker Gray.  Weathering is all powders: some medium gray, a charcoal gray, and an earth brown, all brushed lightly on.  Airbrushing similar colors would probably work fine, and also would be faster.  The one half of the sample is more lightly weathered than the other.  (Note, I think that the weathering looks heavier in-person than in the pics.)

 - For ballast, I used the HO scale AZRM, sifted with a tea strainer to remove the larger granules.   I'm not sure what the exact size is.  It's all glued in place with the WS Scenic Cement.  (Basically, all a matter of using stuff that I already had on hand).

 - One caution with these ties is that they are an older PCB that is more sensitive to heat.  I had to be very careful when soldering, since overheating will delaminate them, and I was using a Sn/Ag/Cu solder.  I do not want to use Pb solder, so I would consider a lower-temperature Sn/Bi alloy (perhaps in paste form).

 - Another caveat with these ties is, the dimensions are not all uniform. I noted variations in length and width, and avoided using any ties that I thought appeared too dissimilar.

So here are the pics:












One further thought:  in close-up pics like these, it's easy to forget how small this stuff actually is.  So while the absence of the clips is pretty evident in pictures, I find it is significantly less so in person.   With that in mind, here are a few proto pics, where I thought that the clips generally look less noticeable:

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/4/5/8/9458.1340218890.jpg
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/8/7/8/5878.1222666605.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7052/6800833288_8506b822f1_o.jpg


Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and opinions!


Ed

[C855B]

Interesting, especially compared to the Walong pics. You're right, in the proto pictures the clips are barely visible. But... they're still perceptible as interruptions of the visual line along the rail base, albeit a lot less so than missing tie plates, my primary "cringe" with hand-laid.

I personally have no interest in concrete in my own modeling, which is just before that era. However, given that caveat, to get the effect I would probably put some resin or glue or something like that in a syringe with a small needle, and "dot" the rail base at the center of each tie. FWIW.

[garethashenden]

Did you investigate Easitrack? It is available with concrete sleepers although I don't know enough about concrete ties/sleepers to know if it is at all similar to US track. The most obvious problem is of course that it pushes the gauge out to 9.42mm instead of 9mm.

A quick experiment with 4" of Easitrack and a BLMA truck suggests that this won't work. At least not without cutting a bit out of the middle and gluing it back together. Atlas plastic wheels seem to run fine however.

[ednadolski]

to get the effect I would probably put some resin or glue or something like that in a syringe with a small needle, and "dot" the rail base at the center of each tie. FWIW.

The trick with that approach is to make it uniform, basically machine-like.  Not only the size, but also the position. Even slight deviations become surprisingly visible.  With a jig, there might be some way to do it,  but I need to think further.

Did you investigate Easitrack?

The few pics I saw looked distinctly 'Euro' to me, with the rail chairs instead of the clips.

Ed

[sdodge]

Excellent! Here is a proto photo...

[robert3985]

Ed,

As you and others who hand-lay track know, there's a huge difference between superdetailing a short test-track vs. hand-laying hundreds of feet of it.  Some things that are marginally okay from a labor-intensive aspect on a 1' piece of track become insurmountable when constructing a layout.  Building a HCD layout, or even a slightly larger one allows all that track superdetailing (which I am a big fan of) but doing it to a layout that fills a 12' X 24' room might be a deal breaker.

Case in point.  You and I (and others) have had in our possession for a long time Proto87 Stores frets of etched tie plates.  He uses your photo as an illustration of what they look like when applied to N-scale, code 40 rails and wooden ties.  However, I haven't seen any indication anywhere that anybody has used them to superdetail their code 40 trackage. 

For me, those etched frets won't work as they are because I've already laid my code 40 branchline trackage, so I'd have to snip the center section out of each tie plate, and apply those "ends" to the sides of my rail on every tie.  The tie plates are already miniscule, and my snipping process would make what I'm having to handle, position and glue into place three times smaller.  I'm still mulling it over in my head if it's worth the effort.  Obviously, most everybody thinks that it isn't, and I would bet that Andy's sales go to people who see photos of the fret, then are stunned when they actually see it, hold it and realize how micro-sized these parts really are.

As you've said, the precise positioning of each clip is essential, and we haven't even begun to talk about how they could be manufactured to be a reasonable facsimile of the actual hardware.  I am sure that "blobs" of anything just aren't going to cut it in your mind, and that concept defeats the whole purpose of this exercise.

Truthfully, the only process that even starts to sound feasible is 3D printing, with slide-on ties.  I'm thinking that might be sturdy enough to do the trick and I'm guessing the cost might be equivalent to the 2mm Association milled concrete ties...maybe less if the print is structured properly.  Creating the 3D model wouldn't be difficult as it's not exactly complex. You'd use weathered rail, and after you've cleaned the FUD ties (maybe a less expensive print material could be used) but not dismounted them from their support structure, they'd get painted in bulk, then snipped off, slid onto the rails, positioned and glued down, with feeders on the underside of the rail foot, and no rail joiners (or maybe two of Andy's NS rail joiners every three feet or so). 

Besides the design of the tie/clip combination, you could design in a protruding part on one side of each tie, positioned directly under the rail's position that would be covered by ballast which would space each tie automatically as you slid it onto the rail.  The only bad thing about doing this would be that it would also automatically limit the density of these parts in the print envelope....hmmmm....It'd increase your cost per tie simply because it'd require more setups, since the cost of material would remain the same but your print envelope density would be considerably less (fewer ties in the print envelope).

The other option would be to just construct a fixture like the real railroads did that you insert between the ties when positioning them, then remove it and put it down for the next tie.  That'd work too....more labor intensive...but maybe not much more.

The above would also work for 3D prints of wood ties with tie plates and spike heads.  Hmmmmm....maybe this is something to model, print up and get a baseline cost to see if it'd be financially feasible...and make them available through Shapeway's business model.  Something to think about.

Anyway you look at it, it's way more expensive than what's commercially available in flextrack, but, handlaying track (excluding turnouts) has always been more expensive than flex, unless you had the tools to cut your own ties (both PCB and wood).

I always thought I was picky about track until I read your thread about milling/grinding the railheads.

I've been thinking about the no-tieplate-no-spikehead problem with hand-laid track for decades, and came to the conclusion that adding them would probably not be worth the effort, as the track looks pretty good without 'em....but, the problem continues to "bother" me.  Glad to know I'm not the only one!

Thanks for getting my brain fired up on this Saturday afternoon Ed!  As always, your work is top-notch and thought-provoking!

[GaryHinshaw]

I think it looks great Ed.  How do you like the looks of it in person?  (In my experience, pictures don't always convey a good sense of what these tiny models look like in person.) 

To put things in sharp contrast, here is what the ME Code 55 track looks like with its oversize Pandrol clips:





The first shot really exaggerates their appearance, compared to how I perceive them in person.  But the part that bugs me most about the ME concrete tie track is the appearance of under-rail connecters that join the ties together.  Since they are grey, they tend to stand out when you're looking at the track from eye level, and adding more ballast to bury them makes the track look over-ballasted to me.  Sigh.  Anyway, that's another advantage of individual ties.

What are your plans going forward, Ed?  Is the "tunnel" layout getting a green light now?   

-gfh

P.S. Your hopper looks awesomely massive on that track!

[Leggy]

Almost no reason for me not to learn how to handlay track and turnouts now, that looks awesome!

[ednadolski]

doing it to a layout that fills a 12' X 24' room might be a deal breaker.

No question.  It's the classic tradeoff of resources vs. desired results.   Honestly, if super-highly-detailed trackwork is the top priority, then N scale might not be the best fit.  Of course there is always Proto:48, and even that is improving now that folks can do very accurate 1/48 scale tie plates and other details from Shapeways.... 

Case in point.  You and I (and others) have had in our possession for a long time Proto87 Stores frets of etched tie plates.  He uses your photo as an illustration of what they look like when applied to N-scale, code 40 rails and wooden ties.  However, I haven't seen any indication anywhere that anybody has used them to superdetail their code 40 trackage. 

For me, those etched frets won't work as they are because I've already laid my code 40 branchline trackage, so I'd have to snip the center section out of each tie plate, and apply those "ends" to the sides of my rail on every tie.  The tie plates are already miniscule, and my snipping process would make what I'm having to handle, position and glue into place three times smaller.  I'm still mulling it over in my head if it's worth the effort.  Obviously, most everybody thinks that it isn't, and I would bet that Andy's sales go to people who see photos of the fret, then are stunned when they actually see it, hold it and realize how micro-sized these parts really are.

Honestly, I found those tieplates very hard to handle individually.  (BTW in that sample, the paint is the only thing holding them in place.)   I can't imagine trying to trim them and apply them individually.   Considering how hard they are even to see without magnification & strong light, it is definitely a diminishing return on the effort -- unless your top-priority goal is to do really close-up pics of the track.

The above would also work for 3D prints of wood ties with tie plates and spike heads.  Hmmmmm....maybe this is something to model, print up and get a baseline cost to see if it'd be financially feasible...and make them available through Shapeway's business model.  Something to think about.

I had tried making a tie strip, but the Shapeways printout came out looking more like half-melted granular sugar (a pretty spectacular fail: http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o153/ednadolski/IMG_0803.jpg).  That was the white/strong material; I have considered the FUD, but the cost came out to around $1 per inch. I also have concerns about the strength of that material for a part that size, and it opens up the question of how to attach the rail to the ties.  I suppose the Pliobond or Barges cement could work, tho I have no clue how that would react with the FUD plastics. 

Really I think the way to go is make up a tie strip in injection-molded plastic.  The estimates I had on tooling and a small production run were in the $4000-$7000 ballpark.  Do you know any modern-era N-scalers who would like to get in on some finescale trackwork?   

I always thought I was picky about track until I read your thread about milling/grinding the railheads.

Well, the code 55 rail was designed as small rail for HO, not for N scale, and to my eye it shows. 


Ed

[peteski]

I'm not a track or tie expert (concrete or wood), but to my eyes the ME track with concrete ties looks better than the handlaid version.  The handlaid version looks so plain without the rail clips.  The oversized clips on the ME track, IMO, look better than no clips at all.

I think that the naturally-light color of the ties really exaggerates the absence of the clips.  This problem is not as prominent on handlaid wood ties. That is because the color of ties and rail is very similar.  That greatly diminishes the fact that there is no hardware on handlaid wood ties.  With handlaid concrete ties, the lack of hardware is highly noticeable.

[ednadolski]

I think it looks great Ed.  How do you like the looks of it in person?  (In my experience, pictures don't always convey a good sense of what these tiny models look like in person.) 

I do like the finescale look.  As Peteski points out, the color contrast seems a bit stark to me, and the powders don't quite do the trick to my satisfaction.  I'm going to try airbrushing with an overall gray/grime coat, and see if that blends it all together.

the part that bugs me most about the ME concrete tie track is the appearance of under-rail connecters that join the ties together.  Since they are grey, they tend to stand out when you're looking at the track from eye level, and adding more ballast to bury them makes the track look over-ballasted to me.  Sigh.  Anyway, that's another advantage of individual ties.

Agreed, and that also makes it impractical to try to replace the C55 rail in the flextrack with C40. The C40 rail base is too narrow, so the web shows up and cannot be covered.

What are your plans going forward, Ed?  Is the "tunnel" layout getting a green light now?   

The tunnel module is on hold for now, for two reasons: (a) I am not happy with the foam base construction, specifically the joint system is looking rather dicey.  Likely the whole thing should be rebuilt.  Also (b) I am not sure how well I can fit it in to a future layout, given my current space limitations.   So for now I am chalking it up as a learning experience.

P.S. Your hopper looks awesomely massive on that track!

Thanks!   I think that's one of the key motivators for the C40 rail.   Altho the difference is subtle, the effect is definitely noticeable, and cannot really be achieved any other way.


Ed

[MichaelWinicki]

I'm not a track or tie expert (concrete or wood), but to my eyes the ME track with concrete ties looks better than the handlaid version.  The handlaid version looks so plain without the rail clips.  The oversized clips on the ME track, IMO, look better than no clips at all.

I think that the naturally-light color of the ties really exaggerates the absence of the clips.  This problem is not as prominent on handlaid wood ties. That is because the color of ties and rail is very similar.  That greatly diminishes the fact that there is no hardware on handlaid wood ties.  With handlaid concrete ties, the lack of hardware is highly noticeable.

I agree with that take.  I like the clips even though they are oversized.  The eye simply expects them to be there. 

[GaryHinshaw]

Really I think the way to go is make up a tie strip in injection-molded plastic.  The estimates I had on tooling and a small production run were in the $4000-$7000 ballpark.  Do you know any modern-era N-scalers who would like to get in on some finescale trackwork?   

I think I mentioned this to you before, but at last year's local RPM meet, John Socha-Leialoha showed some samples of his injection molded concrete ties that he was developing for a MOW load.  Here are two shots from Andrew Hutchinson's Flickr page:



Because of they way they're bundled, the existing molds are not suitable for track, but I could envision a simple variant that might be just the ticket and John might be interested.    I don't have any contact info for him, but Andrew probably does, so you could PM him.  It could be a great meeting of minds!

 

[ednadolski]

Well, I have been looking at this off and on for a bit now, and I have to admit that it isn't exactly growing on me.  In fact, in the absence of the clips, I am starting to see the code 40 rail as actually looking somewhat undersized (which it is).   Ah well, at least this was interesting, if for no other reason than to find out what these milled PCB ties look like when built up into track.

I have had an alternate idea that I am looking at.  This is not with concrete ties, but with some etched, near-scale tieplates and spikes that I have been wanting to try out.  These are different than the P:87 tieplates, in that (1) they are a scale 8" x 14", and (2) they have spike holes instead of the dummy spike heads.   Being larger, they are a bit easier to handle, and I hope that they will be more visible when painted.   Here is a sample that I had built (somewhat hastily):





These are scaled to fit under the code 40 rail base.  They are mostly half-etched, but since the areas that ho next to the rail base are full-thickness metal (0.010" in this case), they are actually fairly easy to assemble since they do not tend to move around too much once they are positioned between the rail and the tie.   One thing that would make the whole process a lot easier:  some heavier track gauges (perhaps machined from a small block of steel), to keep things from moving around before they can be spiked.

The ties in this sample are simply glued onto a piece of foamboard, as I wanted to see how well the spikes would hold in just the ties...  not too well, as it unfortunately turns out.  The foam is too soft and tends to sink a bit when pushing in the spikes.  I'll have to try this again with a proper roadbed, perhaps Homasote (if I can ever get my hands on some)....


Ed

[unittrain]

Love that track man that is awesome  I wish someone could offer code 55 tie plates like that!.