Concrete Tie strip for N Scale and Code 40 Rail

[ednadolski]

To that end, for Code 40 mainline track: Tie spacing at 20" and tie dimensions of 9" x 7" x 9' (108").  Branch and siding are 8" x 7" x 8.5' at 22" or 24" spacing. 

Is it possible to make the branch strip ties with some slight angling, so that they are less perfectly parallel than the mainline ties?

On M.E. flextrack, the design of the webbing helps ensure that the ties will not be quite so parallel, esp. on curves.

Ed

[narrowminded]

So if you are doing a code 40 UP branch, with 9' ties, you will need to also do a section or two of 9' ties on the main .. otherwise it might look "off"

Branch lines are and remain at 8'6".  It is only mainline ties that are being considered for 9' ties.

[narrowminded]

Another color test w/the concrete tie strips:  here are a few quick pics of a strip, using an artist's paint pen to color the tie clips.  This kind of pen has a point tip on one end and a chisel tip on the other; I found that the latter was easier & faster for me:

It's a little hard to see in the pics, but one thing that is different from using a brush is that you get less paint on the sides of the clips.   This has the effect of making the clips look smaller when viewed from a low side angle.

(Edit - I forgot to mention, I painted the clips before installing the rail.)

(Side note: you don't want to use a Sharpie for this, if you are going to spray alcohol to wet the ballast for gluing.)

Ed

I get it on the Sharpie.  That would be quite a let down to get all of that done and then have it bleed all over when ballasting.  

So this Copic Marker is a paint pen?  Or at least alcohol resistant?  I really like it and the same idea should be able to be used on the wood ties.  I ordered some 1mm paint pen tips to use with paint as I described above.  I'll definitely want to try the Copic piece though.  If it does the job it will certainly be less effort than the individual tip.  Very nice as usual, Ed.

[narrowminded]

Is it possible to make the branch strip ties with some slight angling, so that they are less perfectly parallel than the mainline ties?

On M.E. flextrack, the design of the webbing helps ensure that the ties will not be quite so parallel, esp. on curves.

Ed

Yes, that can certainly be done and has already been considered.  There was a concern on my part about being able to readily trim and then butt pieces but really, that's just a worry that I don't think is valid.  It should be easy enough to keep the rails/ guides aligned and spaced using the recommended .040" square styrene strip set into one side's guides and visually determining a good tie spacing.  The more I'm working with this the more comfortable I am with these possibilities.

My original thought for this detail was to go ahead and lay the uniformly spaced strip and then, once the tie base glue has set a little, snip, wet, and shift whichever ties you wanted using a piece of styrene or rail to assure guide alignment.  The more I have experimented with this the more I think that's not necessary.  It can be built in as you're suggesting.

When more feedback is in I will get to work on edits incorporating all of the cosmetic changes determined to be useful.  You're down for angled and less than perfect tie spacing.    I'm thinking it's well worth a trial.

[ednadolski]

So this Copic Marker is a paint pen?  Or at least alcohol resistant? 

LOL, you've caught me.... I bought it so long ago that I actually don't remember.  I just used it 'cuz that's what I had on hand, and I wanted to show the chisel tip... 


Edit - this says it's alcohol based ink:   https://www.amazon.com/Copic-Marker-SB12-12-Piece-Sketch/dp/B000MRR3GU



Ed

[narrowminded]

The Code 55 to Code 40 transition bed is out of the printer and seems good to go.   It is spaced as branch ties.  There may be some use for other tie arrangements, maybe mainline, especially for mixing and matching or patching in pieces.  If so, they can be made but for now I'm just doing the branch line. 

This piece is to assure proper rail alignment when transitioning from code 55 to code 40 rail, accurately aligning the rail top and inside edge (gauge) without the use of rail joiners or other difficult or tedious to execute methods that often have results less than optimum.  It has two ties at the code 55 dimensions to accept the code 55 rail and then transitions to code 40 for the balance of the strip. The rail gauge and height are nicely matched at this point. 

Because a likely place to use this strip is coming off a turnout from a mainline or another branch line it also has the UP spec double spikes on the outside rail, required for 40' of track past any turnout.  This piece of tie bed nominally represents that length at 3 1/8" long (41') with UP spiking pattern 4B.  From there on the standard branch or siding tie bed can attach, continuing the run at the normal pattern for the bed being used.  If different spike patterns were needed they could be added but until requested this will be it.

Here are some photos showing the freshly minted pieces in a trial fit with an Atlas #5 Code 55 turnout.  Coming off of the turnout, the last two non-prototypical interrupted ties allowing for a rail joiner to pass in normal service have been trimmed off.  The adapter tie bed registers to that short length of rail.  These pics show where the adapter is installed, the need for such an adapter, as well as the effectiveness of it in use. 

This turnout is out of spec by .005" over max NMRA spec on the entry, .002" over NMRA spec in the view with the tie bed, and at the maximum in the adjacent through run.  This type of error is not uncommon.   Even a turnout within NMRA spec can be misaligned by as much as .009" when one is at the max and one at the minimum so this alignment will almost never be perfect but with this arrangement it is good, first time, every time.  

Pic one, the last two ties, interrupted for the rail joiners to pass, are removed.  The two trimmed ties are filled in with the first two ties of the adapter and are what engage with the code 55 rail to accurately accomplish the transition:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]


Pic two, the adapter is in position at the turnout but the code 55 rail is not pressed into its guides and shows the misalignment that will have to be corrected by whatever adaption method is used.  The code 40 tie bed is the one meeting NMRA spec.  The turnout is not:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]


And final pic is the code 55 rail engaged in the tie pockets and guides, aligning the code 55 rail inside edge (gauge) and height with the code 40 rail:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

This how a branch line or siding might be installed with Code 40 on a typical Code 55 layout.  Even I can work with this! 

[narrowminded]

LOL, you've caught me.... I bought it so long ago that I actually don't remember.  I just used it 'cuz that's what I had on hand, and I wanted to show the chisel tip... 


Edit - this says it's alcohol based ink:   https://www.amazon.com/Copic-Marker-SB12-12-Piece-Sketch/dp/B000MRR3GU



Ed

OK.  The idea is still valid. 

I have ordered some 1mm tips to experiment with.  They might be OK as they come but as I mentioned previously, I experimented with a larger tip stolen from another paint marker and held in my pin vise.  It seemed to work well and would probably be able to be dialed in as far as paint color and consistency.  I was able to chisel shape the tip with the side of my cut-off wheel in my rotary tool.  They can also be cleaned in Acetone, ready for another use.  When they come in would you want me to drop one in an envelope to you?  Maybe Robert, too?

I still want to come up with a way to mask the space between the tie guides where the rail will be glued for painting them without the rail installed.  To that end, do you (or anybody) know of any sticker type glue, maybe spray on?  If I had such a product I could envision spraying one side of the .040" styrene, inserting it between the tie guides, stuck and sealed, and then paint with Acrylic paint in the airbrush.  The idea of acrylic paint is to not dissolve the masking glue, making a sticky mess of it.  When done, cleanly remove the styrene strips and reuse for the next one. 

Pliobond left to dry reasonably complete might work for this but I haven't tried it yet.  One advantage would be, if there's any residual glue left in the groove it could be left as it would remelt right in with the final rail install.  (It can be reactivated with Acetone).  But there must be something that would accomplish this more easily and with assured results.   I like things that just plain work.

[robert3985]

Well ain't that special.   Guess who's feeding a lot of the raw info here.   @robert3985 , Mr. UP himself!   I actually find that pretty humorous and if Robert wants 9' ties, Robert gets 9' ties.  He and Ed Nadolski has been very helpful.  This is a really good example of what this is all about.  We can have a lot of details at little to no extra cost.  I'll make 9', UP mainline, and then continue with 8'6" for (most) everything else?  Agreed?

Is there any other good tie tidbits that you could shed light on?  Switches at 19.5" spacing for example?  Bridge track? Anything else that strikes you?

Hahaha! @narrowminded Mark, and OTHERS...I am going to assume the ideal business model for producing 3D printed parts is to not have any inventory on hand (or a very low inventory), meaning parts are printed when ordered and paid for so no taxation occurs every quarter on your existing inventory.  If anybody else wants different sized mainline ties, then by all means get off your butts and send Mark some prototype drawings!  That's all I've done.  My drawings happen to be mostly U.P. drawings because that's what I'm modeling.

Mark and I, and I assume Ed @ednadolski , have put our heads together using prototype drawing/photos to come up with what looks best and builds well in N-scale.  This includes making some of the printed-on components not exactly like the prototype, either in style or dimension.  For instance, scale-sized spikeheads would be essentially non-visible, and tie plates that were scale-sized in thickness would also be difficult, if not impossible to see.  On the other hand, square spike-holes not being used in the tie-plates are difficult to print because of the limitations of the resin and 3D printer, and the layering/curing process, especially with sharp corners and a functional depth.

BUT, with my sharp, Optivisored eyes critically looking at the ties strips that Mark has sent me for evaluation, and comparing them to the best flextrack ever made (Rail-Craft C40) and present-day Micro Engineering C40 flex, I don't have to be a genius to see that what Mark has developed looks exponentially better than any injection molded N-scale track EVER PRODUCED!

As to Mark's choice of tie dimensions, location and spacing, spikehead dimensions, tie plate dimensions and spike patterns being derived from official Union Pacific drawings, here's my reply:

During the Harriman Era, or "Common Standard Era", track standards, along with many other railroad standards, applied to Union Pacific, Southern Pacific, and possibly to Illinois Central, Chesapeake Ohio & Southwestern, Louisville & Nashville.   

Of note is that all of each railroad's subsidiary roads also fell under Harriman's "Common Standard" requirements, which would include similar track standards.

Since I model the U.P. from 1947 through 1956, my information is relegated to the Union Pacific and UP's subsidiaries...the Oregon Shortline Railroad (OSL), the Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Company (OWR&N), and the Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad (LA&SL). 

Some of the information I've sent Mark is obsolete for the modern U.P., and some information doesn't apply to U.P. in the transition era I'm modeling, but is correct for relatively modern (1960's through 1980's) track.

Since most model railroaders know that Union Pacific has been busy acquiring both major and small railroads over the years, I was going to post a list of railroads that once existed but have been controlled by, and finally fully owned by Union Pacific, but the list is waaaay too long.  Major railroads that U.P. has acquired in the latter part of the 20th Century are: Southern Pacific, Missouri Pacific, Western Pacific, Rock Island, MKT, Spokane International Railroad, and the C&NW.

Union Pacific has also signed trackage rights to other major railroads, particularly BNSF which allows BNSF to run on tracks previously owned by WP, SP and UP.

Sooooo....what this much-condensed and brief acquisition history of Harriman and Union Pacific points out, is that modeling a new track product using dimensions derived from Union Pacific official documents is a good choice, because chances are, they are identical or very similar to many, if not the majority, of railroads in the USA.

Everybody should also know that I am not "pushing" Mark to do Union Pacific trackage. I have simply supplied him with official drawings of prototype Union Pacific track standards, and he has made his own choices as to what to produce.

On the other hand, posting here and just saying that a certain weight of rail was very common, or a certain dimension of tie was very common, or a certain type of tie plate was most common, or a certain spike pattern was most common...none of these claims hold water unless you have documentation...and even then, as both Mark and I have determined, "most common" is usually not indicated on the prototype drawings because they are all for specific applications and what is "most common" is just a statistic, and of no interest to those actually building the tracks.

From my initial observations of Mark's wooden tie strips in-hand, I would only suggest two things: (1) lower the connectors/spacers between ties to half-tie height to allow ballast to cover them on straight track, with daylight under the rail between ties, and make them easier to clip off on curved track (2) Take Ed's suggestion and put some non-parallel ties on the light traffic siding tie strips.

The Holiday Season has caught me up with family events and shoveling snow, so my detailed review and photos will happen after New Year's Day...also my youngest son's birthday, and one day short of my youngest granddaughter's birthday!

Later today, I'll be showing Mark's wooden tie strips to several N-scale model railroad friends of mine at a little impromptu op session in Salt Lake City. 

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

 

 

[Maletrain]

I have been following this thread with great joy, and hope to use some of the final results.

A couple of tangential thoughts came while reading some of the posts:

1.  Concerning whether epoxy can withstand repeated heating and cooling cycles when attaching two dissimilar materials - there is a version of epoxy that is designed to stay slightly flexible after it cures.  It is called G/flex, by West System.  I have used it to attach a stainless steel hinge to a plexiglass panel cover on my sailboat, and it has withstood many years of scorching summer sun and winter deep freezes without loosening.  It is "thickened", so it might be a little clumsy to use in N scale, but, having worked with it elsewhere, I think it is doable.  It comes in two 4.5 oz tubes, and cures slowly.

2.  To me, the "look" of model track has a lot to do with the height of the rails relative to the tops of the ties, with the track gauge providing the best visual scale reference.  I took the opportunity to measure some real rail, on what was once the Reading mainline, now using 132 lb welded rail.  The actual rail height is 7-1/8", which comes out to 0.0445" in N scale.  But, it is sitting on top of tie plates that are 3/4" thick under the rails, so in N scale, that adds another 0.004+" to the height of the rail head above the ties, making the net visual effect more like N scale track made with code 49 rail, if the model rail seat between the visible ends of the tie plates is at the same level as the ties.  My caliper tells me that ME "code 40" rail is really code 43, which is equivalent to prototype rail that is 6-7/8" tall.  But, if the model rail base is sitting at tie top level, then it will make track that looks more like prototype track made with rail that is only 6-1/8" tall, sitting on top of 3/4" thick tie plates.  That is down in the 105-to-110 lb rail range, which is much more like "branch line" track that we have been thinking.  Similar reasoning tells me that N scale code 55 rail, which scales to 8.8" in prototype section height, has about the same appearance as rail that is about 8" high sitting on top of 3/4" tie plates.  So, that looks like a model of heavy mainline rail that is in the 152-to-155 lb range, which was not common except on heavy Pennsy tracks.  However, if the model tie strip for code 55 rail could be made with the seat for the rail 0.006" lower than the tie upper surface level, then N scale model track made with code 55 rail could be made to have roughly the same appearance as prototype track made with 125-to-132 lb rail.  The "depth of base" on the code 55 rail that I just checked with a caliper is about 0.018" thick, so setting that down about a third of its thickness doesn't seem like it would be a visual issue on the finished model.  (For those who are interested in rail section dimensions for different rail weights and designs, look here: https://www.wabtec.com/uploads/outlinedrawings/Track-Components-Section.pdf .)



 

[Missaberoad]

Historical point of order, Union Pacific never acquired Rock Island. They own some of their former track, but No one acquired the company, it was liquidated... 

That post almost borders on political or religious Bob! 
By your argument the best prototype for  N Scale Track should be CN standards since they controlled more mileage and fallen flags 

Tongue firmly in cheek of course...

As far as most common vs standards, the method to be most accurate would be to look at condensed profiles for your chosen prototype... For most roads they listed the rail weight, ballast material, dates for installation.
It's a interesting rabbit hole to venture down, makes me wish there was sub code 40 rail to accurately recreate the size differences...

[narrowminded]

As far as most common vs standards, the method to be most accurate would be to look at condensed profiles for your chosen prototype... For most roads they listed the rail weight, ballast material, dates for installation.
It's a interesting rabbit hole to venture down, makes me wish there was sub code 40 rail to accurately recreate the size differences...

In the interest of moving along with the project and satisfying the broadest needs, something that is pretty highly detailed and offers enough variation to enable a modeler to nicely represent their chosen locale, are there any other suggestions you might have from your experience? 

I think that the 9' mainline ties, especially when positioned next to 8.5" ties and being very road specific, will justify two offerings for mainline.  9' UP spec and 8.5' "standard" spec.  Then 9"x 7" mainline and 8"x 7" branch and siding ties.  Is the 8' branch and siding tie length important to make available? It seems like it might be.

[Maletrain]

The tracks around here (eastern U.S.) seem to mostly have 8-1/2" long ties, 9" wide, spaced at various distances on track with different rail weights.  So, my preference is 8.5' for both mainline and secondary track ties, both 9" wide, with the difference being that the secondary track has ties spaced more widely and less evenly.

I will probably want to use code 55 for the mainline, especially if you can make the rail bases sit about 0.006" lower than the tops of the ties, as I described in my previous post.  The different size rails plus the different tie spacing and evenness should make a strong enough statement that one is mainline and the other is secondary, without making different tie lengths.

[narrowminded]

 @ednadolski , and @robert3985 I visited Michael's today and found some finishing supplies that definitely have promise.  It's a fillable pen with a 1mm hard tip and a small bottle of acrylic ink, not water based, with an eye dropper for dispensing.  I dressed the pen tip to a straight chisel.  Here are some samples from tie bed I had already painted with Krylon Camo and assembled with rail painted with MM acrylic.  I hand colored these tie plates with no masking or anything special other than using a mid power optivisor.  The ink is waterproof and stands straight application of 99% alcohol with no bleed.  Also applies thin and dries very flat and shrinks to not hide the details.  I'm liking the way the materials act if not the colors. 

Here are a couple of pics:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

I'm enjoying the way this is coming together. 

[narrowminded]

The tracks around here (eastern U.S.) seem to mostly have 8-1/2" long ties, 9" wide, spaced at various distances on track with different rail weights.  So, my preference is 8.5' for both mainline and secondary track ties, both 9" wide, with the difference being that the secondary track has ties spaced more widely and less evenly.

I will probably want to use code 55 for the mainline, especially if you can make the rail bases sit about 0.006" lower than the tops of the ties, as I described in my previous post.  The different size rails plus the different tie spacing and evenness should make a strong enough statement that one is mainline and the other is secondary, without making different tie lengths.

I think that may have merit and can be definitely be done.  There may be an issue with appearance at the tie plates as they will effectively look like they are way up on the rail foot.  In the first efforts that was an issue and the plate was lowered to not mask the foot as much, keep the appearance of a real tie plate.  Anybody else have any thoughts on this?  For all I can do, my artistic eye isn't always the best.

[ednadolski]

1.  Concerning whether epoxy can withstand repeated heating and cooling cycles when attaching two dissimilar materials - there is a version of epoxy that is designed to stay slightly flexible after it cures.  It is called G/flex, by West System.  I have used it to attach a stainless steel hinge to a plexiglass panel cover on my sailboat, and it has withstood many years of scorching summer sun and winter deep freezes without loosening.  It is "thickened", so it might be a little clumsy to use in N scale, but, having worked with it elsewhere, I think it is doable.  It comes in two 4.5 oz tubes, and cures slowly.

That sounds pretty promising.  Not that I have anything against Pliobond, as I've rarely used it.  However when I have it's been rather stringy and messy to work, and I found it hard to make it go where I wanted.  I've heard that some folks thin it with MEK (I prefer to avoid the nastier chemical solvents) and others have been able to apply it with a fine syringe (not sure if that was for C40 rail tho). 

I've also heard that Pliobond can be heat cured by applying a soldering iron to the rail after setting it into  place on the ties.  IDK how well that would work with printed ties, as I suspect they would have a low tolerance for that level of heat.

Seems that the syringe applicator might work well for the G/flex on C40 rail. it's just one of those things I'd have to get around to trying out