Scratch-building a long turnout in Z scale

[ednadolski]

One of the advantages in a small scale like Z is that you can model more prototypical proportions for curves and turnouts.   Here is something I've just recently completed (at least to the point of functioning, if not yet cosmetically finished): a #12 turnout with code 40 rail on PCB ties.

Mainly, I wanted to see how this would work to have such a long frog, and whether wheel drop might be an issue.  While I do notice some drop in the video, at least with this short train it does not seem to be an issue, and it even is hard to see in person.    One thing that I do like is, the way the engines seem to just 'glide' thru the diverging route, as opposed to sharper turnouts where they just seem to 'lurch' as they pass thru.

The build begins with PCB ties placed onto both an LH and a RH template:




Building the frogs (note how the filings stick to the double-sided tape -- makes me glad that I do not use lead-bearing solder):




The completed and wired turnout, with a commercial Atlas #6 for comparison:




Closeup of the frog area. Rail gaps were cut using a jeweler's saw.  The open flangeway area isn't very noticeable in-person, but I can always fill it in if the wheel drop becomes an issue:




Closeup of the points, hard-soldered to the throwbars.   I originally thought to do them as continuous point/closure rails, but decided to try making hinges from rail joiners. I did grind away the tops of the joiners to keep them from potentially interfering with wheel flanges.   

Hinged joints made it necessary to add some jumper wires for good conductivity.  The wires will ultimately be buried under roadbed/ballast, but boy, in Z scale that AWG 30 wire sure looks beefy.




The joiners are only about 1/8" long:




Finally, a video of a test train making a few passes back and forth.  (the turnout is just quick-and-dirty soldered to the code 55 flextrack, so those joints are not the smoothest):

(Now I gotta go finish the LH one  )


Cheers,
Ed

[peteski]

Pretty impressive Ed!  I'm curious why you chose to use hinged points instead of just notching the base of the closure rails using continuous rail?  The amount of flexing at that "hinge" point would be minimal (especially in Z gauge), and there would be no needs for wires.

[JeffB]

Pretty impressive Ed!  I'm curious why you chose to use hinged points instead of just notching the base of the closure rails using continuous rail?  The amount of flexing at that "hinge" point would be minimal (especially in Z gauge), and there would be no needs for wires.

Agree...  I won't build turnouts with hinged point rails and I use Code 70 rail for Sn2 (HOn3)..  Code 40 can flex a lot more easily than Code 70, that's for sure!  Though I hinge the points at the throwbar, just to make sure that the force to move them is minimal and I don't break solder joints that way.

Gorgeous turnout though Ed...  Impressive as hell!  Haven't used Code 40 rail in nearly 35yrs.  A few quick licks with a file is all it must take to profile the rail for frogs and points. 

Jeff

[ednadolski]

Thanks all for lookign and commenting!    responses below:

I'm curious why you chose to use hinged points instead of just notching the base of the closure rails using continuous rail?  The amount of flexing at that "hinge" point would be minimal (especially in Z gauge), and there would be no needs for wires.

Mostly for looks, as I prefer the look of an actual hinge, which to my eye is noticeable even on a longer turnout.  Also, since I was planning to have a second throwbar, I wanted to be able to have movement with minimal resistance while ensuring the gauge throughout the length of the points.

A few quick licks with a file is all it must take to profile the rail for frogs and points.

My preferred tool lately is a small grinding wheel in a hand-held rotary tool.   But yeah, then a flat or dovetail file for cleaning up after the wheel, and for finer work.

Cheers,
Ed

[robert3985]

Thanks all for lookign and commenting!    responses below:

Mostly for looks, as I prefer the look of an actual hinge, which to my eye is noticeable even on a longer turnout.  Also, since I was planning to have a second throwbar, I wanted to be able to have movement with minimal resistance while ensuring the gauge throughout the length of the points.

Cheers,
Ed

I agree with Ed @ednadolski   Although Code40 rail is less likely to cause stress solder-joint breaks at the throwbar, especially if the monolithic point rail/closure rail is kept long (not soldered to a tie where the point rail heel hinge would begin) because Code40 rail is flexible enough to minimize the torque that larger rail will cause, the hinged turnout will "look" more prototypical when long-viewed because of the distinct prototypical kink at the point rail heel hinges.

Photo (1) - Prototype long-view showing distinctive "kinks" at the point rail heel hinges:


Photo (2) - Here's a similar view of one of my Code40 Park City Branch turnouts in N-scale showing the kink at the point rail heel hinge:


Also, fabricating hinges at the point rail heels adds realism since there are hinges at that location prototypically, and are particularly evident when viewing from a typical modeler's viewpoint of almost directly overhead.

Although electrical conductivity reliability and maybe track alignment is more easily achieved using monolithic point rail/closure rails, realism suffers.

For both electrical reliability and realistic appearance, taking a bit more time to do it like Ed's doing it is well worth the effort IMO.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[peteski]

If hinge is preferred you shouldn't need a length of wire to connect the points to the closure rail. Since the movement at the hinge is minimal you could easily solder a single very short piece of solid 30 AWG copper wire under the rails  (shaped like a handle for a briefcase).  It will do the same job as a loop of insulated wire and will not break.

Peteski

[Maletrain]

Peteski, I am no expert on this, but I am wondering if your suggestion to solder a short length of wire to the point rails would defeat the purpose of having the hinge.  As I understand the purpose of the hinge in the model, it is to allow the point rails to move a bit along the direction of their length, so that there is no stress on their weld joints to the throw bar in that direction when they are thrown.  So, instead of a straight piece of wire bridging the hinge joint, perhaps a small "C" shaped piece of wire, which could easily bend slightly.  That seems to be what ednadolski had in mind, but his "C" shape is much larger than necessary.

[JeffB]

Hinged point rails are definitely prototypical...  I guess it comes down to what you're willing to build and what/if any risk involved is worth the trouble.

My earliest HOn2 Code 40 turnout experiments used hinged point rails (rail joiners) and were also hinged at the throwbar.  A lot of work, but to each his own.

I was always concerned about the rail joiners failing, and never liked the idea of soldered jumper wires buried under the turnout or in ballast being a long term solution to maintaining electrical conductivity to the points.

Jeff

[peteski]

Peteski, I am no expert on this, but I am wondering if your suggestion to solder a short length of wire to the point rails would defeat the purpose of having the hinge.  As I understand the purpose of the hinge in the model, it is to allow the point rails to move a bit along the direction of their length, so that there is no stress on their weld joints to the throw bar in that direction when they are thrown.  So, instead of a straight piece of wire bridging the hinge joint, perhaps a small "C" shaped piece of wire, which could easily bend slightly.  That seems to be what ednadolski had in mind, but his "C" shape is much larger than necessary.

That is exactly what I meant:  a shallow "C" shaped piece of wire soldered under the rail web. I  described it (in my English-2nd-language loss for better description) as a "briefcase handle" .  It doesn't need insulation, and in only has to be long enough to easily hide under the rail. Such wire is much more flexible than a piece of rail and with minimal deflection it will easily keep flexing without breaking. I would use a piece of stripped 30 AWG wire-wrapping wire.

[Tad_T]

Would magnet wire work? Or is it too thin?

[ednadolski]

Keep in mind that the wiring in these pics is 'quick and dirty', just enough to be functional.  For a real (or cosmetic) installation my intent would be to re-work it.   (But for that, I'm trying to decide on whether or not I want it to have full details, ie,. tieplates, spikes, braces etc.... that would be pretty hard to see in Z, except maybe in macro pics).

The only concern i'd have with wiring directly under the rail is whether it would require notching any underlying ties to keep the wire or soldering area from lifting up the rail rather than sit flat on it.   Going 'around the ties' is something I have done on other turnouts, and I don't mind having to bury it into the ballast/roadbed, as long as it is done in a way that will not impede any motion or wear on the wire or solder joints.

Cheers,
Ed

[robert3985]

Hinged point rails are definitely prototypical...  I guess it comes down to what you're willing to build and what/if any risk involved is worth the trouble.

My earliest HOn2 Code 40 turnout experiments used hinged point rails (rail joiners) and were also hinged at the throwbar.  A lot of work, but to each his own.

I was always concerned about the rail joiners failing, and never liked the idea of soldered jumper wires buried under the turnout or in ballast being a long term solution to maintaining electrical conductivity to the points.

Jeff

For my last few N-scale turnout center-siding entrance/exits (consisting of three turnouts each) I've used Proto87 point rail heel hinges, which are etched NS.  These give a very nice-looking, sliding hinge with a correctly sized and angled foot-guard on the stock rail/closure rail sides.  However, I still soldered a small "U" shaped piece of phone wire to the bottom of the rail foot between the heel of the point rail and the end of the closure rail at the hinges.  Not a big deal to do, and it's a bit of effort that makes electrical continuity 100% reliable.

I also hinged the throwbar down at the point rail toes...actually two throwbars for each mainline turnout...which works fine for Code55, but won't work on Code40 because of the lower flange clearance height.  I'm in the process of developing a realistic looking version that works just fine with Code40 for the next project, which is the Devil's Slide east siding end, and the Code40 trackage for the Ideal Concrete Plant industrial spur.

However, in following the logic train of sliding hinges on the point rail heels, they're only necessary to relieve torque on un-hinged soldered point rail toe attachments at the throwbar.

If you choose to hinge your point rail toes at the throwbar, then a non-sliding hinge at the point rail heel will work just fine, and these can be constructed in several ways, such as by notching the railhead and railfoot with either a precision triangular file, by notching with a straight cut on either side of the railweb (cutting a bit into either side of the railweb) with a fine blade in a jeweler's saw, OR by soldering a separate brass or bronze plate that just fits the vertical dimension of the railweb between the heel of your point rail and the beginning of your closure rails.  This can be embossed to represent nut/bolt heads for added realism.

But, if hinging your point rail toes at the throwbar is too much trouble and you choose to use just a PCB tie as a throwbar, then sliding hinges at the point rail heels/closure rail ends become necessary IMO, which is what Ed is doing.

On my in-the-near-future Devils Slide layout section, I'll be using throwbar hinges and non-sliding point rail toe hinges on both Code55 and Code40 turnouts, skipping the sliding point rail heel hinges (which aren't necessary with hinged throwbars), which will add a completely reliable and easy electrical connection between the point rails and the adjacent stock rails...without having to solder on a couple of wires per turnout.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore