Track Standards

This forum is dedicated to Riding Scale Railroading with propulsion using other than steam (Hydraulics, diesel engines, gas engines, electric motors, hybrid etc.)

Moderators: Harold_V, WJH

Glenn Brooks
Posts: 1362
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:39 pm
Location: Woodinville, Washington

Track Standards

Post by Glenn Brooks » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:10 am

Does anybody know if Clubs adhere to any de facto safety standards for setting superelevation on curves or leveling track? If so, any numbers?

For example, Iam leveling and tamping some mainline I finished laying, and trying to level all low spots that drop over 1/4” per foot across the track. Also wondering how much superelevation is to much?

Just wondering if there are some excepted rules of thumb to go by.

Thanks
Glenn
Moderator - Grand Scale Forum

Motive power : 1902 A.S.Campbell 4-4-0 American - 12 5/8" gauge, 1955 Ottaway 4-4-0 American 12" gauge

Ahaha, Retirement: the good life - drifting endlessly on a Sea of projects....

User avatar
NP317
Posts: 1348
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:57 pm
Location: Northern Oregon

Re: Track Standards

Post by NP317 » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:33 am

I would expect that no super elevation will be your goal.
With your tight radius curves, and low operating speeds, there should be no need for it.
I can just picture that high speed run through your woods...
~RN

rkcarguy
Posts: 786
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 10:33 am

Re: Track Standards

Post by rkcarguy » Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:30 am

I dug up a IBLS article some time ago that mentioned super-elevation wasn't typically used in model railroading. It's a formula of speed and tons of weight of real trains that makes it work, and the reduced speed and weight just don't really amount to anything at a smaller scale. I think it could actually worsen the situation, and potentially cause a long train to flop over on a tight curve.
As for leveling, I think the flatter everything is, the better...... unless the bumping around is wanted as part of the experience I guess.

If that's the case, here is some inspiration: :shock:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0EgQBOiB24

User avatar
cbrew
Posts: 2714
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:17 pm
Location: Vancouver Wa

Re: Track Standards

Post by cbrew » Fri Jul 13, 2018 12:07 pm

my two cents,
leveling track is/should always be the goal, but it only takes a winter or two to screw that up. as for as super-elevation /positive camber its better then finding negative camber. being a bit top heavy, I came close to derailing my tender when i find a rapid transition to a negative camber. in playing with positive camber at the local club on tight curves. I found with just a few (2 to 5) degrees, the inside flange would often ride the rail head instead of the outer flange. which will help to keep stuff on the rails. so it can be a good thing when dealing with flanges that like to climb.
If it is not live steam. its not worth it.

Pontiacguy1
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:15 am
Location: Tennessee, USA

Re: Track Standards

Post by Pontiacguy1 » Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:12 pm

We did some super-elevation on some of our curves at our club, which hauls the public on a regular basis, and we found that it didn't help. In fact, some riders actually shifted their weight against the super-elevation when they felt it leaning them to the inside a bit, as reported by some of our engineers. Because of this our board of directors policy on all curves is now to make it as flat as possible. If there is a slight super-elevation, then no big deal, but we don't try to put in any, and you definitely don't want it to tip to the outside.

If you are hauling the public and you need super-elevation on your track, you're probably going faster than you should be. I realize that you are not hauling the public, but with low speeds you should not need it at all. I've seen a few tracks where it would be useful, and where it was used, but that is typically some place where there is a lot more track, wider curves, and higher speeds are possible. I would be willing to bet that small branch lines and narrow gauge railroads didn't bother with super-elevation on their curves. For most of us, that's more like what our operations are like anyway.

RONALD
Posts: 521
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:27 am

Re: Track Standards

Post by RONALD » Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:34 pm

Back when we were planing our RR we were thinking of something like 1/2" super-elevation, then we consulted with long time friend Don Angerhofer, and he suggested between 1/4" and 5/16", and that is it.

We started curve #1 in 2007 with 100 foot radius, 7-5/8" gauge, and 5/16th super-elevation, as seen in the first photo.

Because there are only three of us, we are not a club, nine years later after installing several curves we have the second photo. At first we pre-made curved sections, but quickly found it easier to install curves by laying down on a moving cart, as seen in the second photo.

We now use a laser level to level track and set super-elevation, but still try to keep at that suggested amount.

Straight track is made up in ten foot sections at 7-9/16" gauge; still have a few more curves to go!
Attachments
DSCN0636_2.jpg
DSC_2519_2.jpg

User avatar
johnpenn74
Posts: 337
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 12:54 pm
Location: Waiting for next assignment!

Re: Track Standards

Post by johnpenn74 » Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:13 pm

I will cast a vote in support of super elevation. Having worked through a couple of curves I feel it is well worth the effort.

Tools:
In the past I have used a plumbers level that has fractional inch drop / 12". I recommend using 3 targets 1) level, 2) minor tilt (say 1/4 in 12") and 3) major tilt (say 1/2" inch in 12") Note that the Mojor is twice the minor. This will give you about 1/8 and and 1/4 across your track gauge.

Technique:
In practical application, the key thing is to make some notes as to what you are doing, as the track will work out of level or tilt and you need to know where the tilt starts and whether it is major or minor. The prototype actually puts little plates on the ties with the inches of elevation. Indicating where zero is, then when the minor is achieved and then when major is acheived (if you used that much in a particular curve) Also, you might overdue it. I have put in superelevation that later proved to be too much. Put in 1/2 when all that was needed was 1/4. So knowing what went in is useful if you are correcting it to some lower level.

Prototype:
There is no universal calculation for super elevation as the amount of tilt is based on track radius and target operational speed. The same applies for our models; not so much due to physics but due to rider response. I have come to believe that super elevation does not work when riding cars are set up with too much play in the bolster / truck connection. Sure a care with lots of bolster play can go over really rough track, but If the car is too loose, the rider will react trying to either stay perfectly erect or trying to lean in, and not really achieving either one due to the cars instability beneath him , often resulting in a derailment. Think about a steam locomotive, it will lean based on the track superelevation. Cars on the other hand will level out if there is enough play in the bolster.

JP
John Pennington

Project
2 Mich-Cal Shays
Allen 4-4-0 Narrow Gauge Conversion
Reading A5a Camelback 0-4-0
USRA 0-6-0
Clishay
4 Western Wheeled Scraper NG Dump Cars
N&W 4-8-2
ICM 2-10-2
4 Modern Stake Cars
L&N Caboose
4 Big Four Conversion Gondolas

Like I'm actually gonna build all this stuff :-P

User avatar
johnpenn74
Posts: 337
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 12:54 pm
Location: Waiting for next assignment!

Re: Track Standards

Post by johnpenn74 » Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:36 am

Here's the level I use.
Attachments
0715181918.jpg
0715181918a.jpg
John Pennington

Project
2 Mich-Cal Shays
Allen 4-4-0 Narrow Gauge Conversion
Reading A5a Camelback 0-4-0
USRA 0-6-0
Clishay
4 Western Wheeled Scraper NG Dump Cars
N&W 4-8-2
ICM 2-10-2
4 Modern Stake Cars
L&N Caboose
4 Big Four Conversion Gondolas

Like I'm actually gonna build all this stuff :-P

Glenn Brooks
Posts: 1362
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:39 pm
Location: Woodinville, Washington

Re: Track Standards

Post by Glenn Brooks » Sun Jul 29, 2018 2:30 pm

John, did you scribe the lines in the level, or find one that was made that way?

FWIW, I’ve gone back through my lay out and taken out most all the superelevation. Except for a curve on one trestle, where I have 5/8” on a 50’ radius - but it’s 12” gauge. In order to level this out, I need to unbolt all the lag bolts across 7 bents and jack up the low side, then insert spacers and redrill the vertical supports. and put all the lag bolts back in. Not a quick job to say the least. I’ll see what happens after a few test runs.

Glenn
Moderator - Grand Scale Forum

Motive power : 1902 A.S.Campbell 4-4-0 American - 12 5/8" gauge, 1955 Ottaway 4-4-0 American 12" gauge

Ahaha, Retirement: the good life - drifting endlessly on a Sea of projects....

User avatar
NP317
Posts: 1348
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:57 pm
Location: Northern Oregon

Re: Track Standards

Post by NP317 » Sun Jul 29, 2018 9:38 pm

Install 1/2" thick tie plates to nearly level the track.
~RN

User avatar
johnpenn74
Posts: 337
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 12:54 pm
Location: Waiting for next assignment!

Re: Track Standards

Post by johnpenn74 » Wed Aug 01, 2018 6:37 am

The picture is a standard plumbers level. Available as at any hardware store.
John Pennington

Project
2 Mich-Cal Shays
Allen 4-4-0 Narrow Gauge Conversion
Reading A5a Camelback 0-4-0
USRA 0-6-0
Clishay
4 Western Wheeled Scraper NG Dump Cars
N&W 4-8-2
ICM 2-10-2
4 Modern Stake Cars
L&N Caboose
4 Big Four Conversion Gondolas

Like I'm actually gonna build all this stuff :-P

Cary Stewart
Posts: 481
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:54 pm

Re: Track Standards

Post by Cary Stewart » Wed Aug 01, 2018 6:01 pm

There is one caution I would make. Dead flat is fine. A small amount of super elevation is also acceptable but don't even think about a 1 1/2degree angle. Another term for this is positive camber. Now avoid at all costs a negative camber on any curve of any degree of curve. This can happen if the road bed is not tamped or rolled enough and sags with the outside of the curve being lower than the inside. How do I know this? At LALS about 15 years ago we made an addition to the layout called Smith Valley route. It was done in a great hurry and quality suffered. I am not sure if the curve with the negative camber has been corrected yet. Our west end bridge system needs to be repainted. One possibility is to remove all steel sections, transport to another location for sand blasting and painting. If this option is used then the Smith Valley route may become the main line. If the public is riding on that track every weekend then we must fix that negative camber or the riders will enjoy a strange feeling. Not good.
Cary

Post Reply