My arithmetical incompetence rides again.

Working on model railway plans and I want to know: descending steadily from about 15cm to 0 over the course of about 270cm (but involving various curves) = what gradient?

Bubblecar said:

My arithmetical incompetence rides again.

Working on model railway plans and I want to know: descending steadily from about 15cm to 0 over the course of about 270cm (but involving various curves) = what gradient?

1 in 18.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

My arithmetical incompetence rides again.

Working on model railway plans and I want to know: descending steadily from about 15cm to 0 over the course of about 270cm (but involving various curves) = what gradient?

1 in 18.

Ta.

Bubblecar said:

My arithmetical incompetence rides again.

Working on model railway plans and I want to know: descending steadily from about 15cm to 0 over the course of about 270cm (but involving various curves) = what gradient?

Curves are irrelevant, when it comes to gradient. Just 15/270=%gradient. 15/270 = 5.5% gradient.

Having said that, a greater load is placed on a loco with trailing carriages when negotiating curves. Even flat ones. So a curve on a gradient will have a larger effect on the hill climb that a straight gradient. Asking me? 5.5% gradient is waaaaaaay to much. unless you load is only a couple of carriages. 3 – 4 at the most. 2% gradient at the most. ie 2cm in 100cm of track.

I banned any gradients from my layout just for that reason. On DC, struggles and wheels slip up the gradient, and then goes screaming down the other side. DCC handles gradients much better. Back EMF in the decoder.

And just something else to consider. Absolutely NOTHING under bare minimum 20” radius curves. You WILL get derailments.

Woodie said:

Bubblecar said:

My arithmetical incompetence rides again.

Working on model railway plans and I want to know: descending steadily from about 15cm to 0 over the course of about 270cm (but involving various curves) = what gradient?

Curves are irrelevant, when it comes to gradient. Just 15/270=%gradient. 15/270 = 5.5% gradient.

Having said that, a greater load is placed on a loco with trailing carriages when negotiating curves. Even flat ones. So a curve on a gradient will have a larger effect on the hill climb that a straight gradient. Asking me? 5.5% gradient is waaaaaaay to much. unless you load is only a couple of carriages. 3 – 4 at the most. 2% gradient at the most. ie 2cm in 100cm of track.

I banned any gradients from my layout just for that reason. On DC, struggles and wheels slip up the gradient, and then goes screaming down the other side. DCC handles gradients much better. Back EMF in the decoder.

And just something else to consider. Absolutely NOTHING under bare minimum 20” radius curves. You WILL get derailments.

I learnt the hard way.

gradient = rise divided by run

Something for you Paryone. :http://blog.model-train-help.com/2014/08/whats-the-maximum-climbing-gradient-for-model-trains.html”:http://blog.model-train-help.com/2014/08/whats-the-maximum-climbing-gradient-for-model-trains.html

Woodie said:

Something for you Paryone. http://blog.model-train-help.com/2014/08/whats-the-maximum-climbing-gradient-for-model-trains.html

/fixed

Woodie said:

Bubblecar said:

My arithmetical incompetence rides again.

Working on model railway plans and I want to know: descending steadily from about 15cm to 0 over the course of about 270cm (but involving various curves) = what gradient?

Curves are irrelevant, when it comes to gradient. Just 15/270=%gradient. 15/270 = 5.5% gradient.

Having said that, a greater load is placed on a loco with trailing carriages when negotiating curves. Even flat ones. So a curve on a gradient will have a larger effect on the hill climb that a straight gradient. Asking me? 5.5% gradient is waaaaaaay to much. unless you load is only a couple of carriages. 3 – 4 at the most. 2% gradient at the most. ie 2cm in 100cm of track.

I banned any gradients from my layout just for that reason. On DC, struggles and wheels slip up the gradient, and then goes screaming down the other side. DCC handles gradients much better. Back EMF in the decoder.

And just something else to consider. Absolutely NOTHING under bare minimum 20” radius curves. You WILL get derailments.

Ta :)

But you have to bear in mind this is inevitably going to be a rather “extreme” layout, ‘cos of space restrictions.

Maximum space available is no more than 1 metre by 1.5. So ALL my curve radii are smaller than your prescription as I want this to be a continuous-circuit type of layout.

Which is why I’ll only be running very small locos and 4 wheel wagons. But I’ll heed your warning and make the curves as big as is feasible.

As for the gradient, that’s just for an extra circuit connecting an upper and lower circuit. Might be fun to try it out and see what happens :)

Woodie said:

Woodie said:

Something for you Paryone. http://blog.model-train-help.com/2014/08/whats-the-maximum-climbing-gradient-for-model-trains.html

/fixed

Ta, I’ll have a read of it before I hatch any further plans.

Bubblecar said:

Woodie said:

Bubblecar said:

My arithmetical incompetence rides again.

Working on model railway plans and I want to know: descending steadily from about 15cm to 0 over the course of about 270cm (but involving various curves) = what gradient?

Curves are irrelevant, when it comes to gradient. Just 15/270=%gradient. 15/270 = 5.5% gradient.

Having said that, a greater load is placed on a loco with trailing carriages when negotiating curves. Even flat ones. So a curve on a gradient will have a larger effect on the hill climb that a straight gradient. Asking me? 5.5% gradient is waaaaaaay to much. unless you load is only a couple of carriages. 3 – 4 at the most. 2% gradient at the most. ie 2cm in 100cm of track.

I banned any gradients from my layout just for that reason. On DC, struggles and wheels slip up the gradient, and then goes screaming down the other side. DCC handles gradients much better. Back EMF in the decoder.

And just something else to consider. Absolutely NOTHING under bare minimum 20” radius curves. You WILL get derailments.

Ta :)

But you have to bear in mind this is inevitably going to be a rather “extreme” layout, ‘cos of space restrictions.

Maximum space available is no more than 1 metre by 1.5. So ALL my curve radii are smaller than your prescription as I want this to be a continuous-circuit type of layout.

Which is why I’ll only be running very small locos and 4 wheel wagons. But I’ll heed your warning and make the curves as big as is feasible.

As for the gradient, that’s just for an extra circuit connecting an upper and lower circuit. Might be fun to try it out and see what happens :)

My first was 6’ X 4’ . Did it as a practice one with “one of everything” on it “squeezed” on. Track pretty close to the edges, and an “up’n‘over” incline and decent. taking 3/4 of the “loop” to go up’n‘over. Way to steep. Radius too tight for bogie carriages. derailed. Particularly passenger ones. Looked ridiculous to.
I know you are likely to run steam. 4-6-2 locos with tender will derail on tight radius. 2-4-0 Tank locos might be just OK.

wookiemeister said:

gradient = rise divided by run

Actually the other way around, but I was confused by the curves.

Bubblecar said:

wookiemeister said:

gradient = rise divided by run

Actually the other way around, but I was confused by the curves.

don’t feel too bad everyone gets wookied in the end

Disabled ramp maximum gradient 1 in 14. That’s a ridiculous law. Wheelchair ramp doesn’t have to be anywhere near that shallow. What do our resident engineers say?

Footpath, a maximum gradient over longer distances of 1 in 14.

On most railways, the steepest grades were 1 in 40. On a few lines, the steepest grades were 1 in 30. Railway gradients are more gentle than most roads, which can have grades as steep as 1 in 6.

Some forklifts have a maximum grade of 1 in 5.

For trucks, 1 in 8 is a recommended maximum.

For driveways, maximum gradient is 1 in 4.

For embankments at the sides of roads, the standard says not to exceed 1 in 3, but that didn’t stop the Qld government for putting the freeway from Brisbane to Gympie in with a very dangerous 1 in 2.5 side slope. Grrr.

Woodie said:

Bubblecar said:

Woodie said:

Curves are irrelevant, when it comes to gradient. Just 15/270=%gradient. 15/270 = 5.5% gradient.

Having said that, a greater load is placed on a loco with trailing carriages when negotiating curves. Even flat ones. So a curve on a gradient will have a larger effect on the hill climb that a straight gradient. Asking me? 5.5% gradient is waaaaaaay to much. unless you load is only a couple of carriages. 3 – 4 at the most. 2% gradient at the most. ie 2cm in 100cm of track.

I banned any gradients from my layout just for that reason. On DC, struggles and wheels slip up the gradient, and then goes screaming down the other side. DCC handles gradients much better. Back EMF in the decoder.

And just something else to consider. Absolutely NOTHING under bare minimum 20” radius curves. You WILL get derailments.

Ta :)

But you have to bear in mind this is inevitably going to be a rather “extreme” layout, ‘cos of space restrictions.

Maximum space available is no more than 1 metre by 1.5. So ALL my curve radii are smaller than your prescription as I want this to be a continuous-circuit type of layout.

Which is why I’ll only be running very small locos and 4 wheel wagons. But I’ll heed your warning and make the curves as big as is feasible.

As for the gradient, that’s just for an extra circuit connecting an upper and lower circuit. Might be fun to try it out and see what happens :)

My first was 6’ X 4’ . Did it as a practice one with “one of everything” on it “squeezed” on. Track pretty close to the edges, and an “up’n‘over” incline and decent. taking 3/4 of the “loop” to go up’n‘over. Way to steep. Radius too tight for bogie carriages. derailed. Particularly passenger ones. Looked ridiculous to.
I know you are likely to run steam. 4-6-2 locos with tender will derail on tight radius. 2-4-0 Tank locos might be just OK.

I’ll be running little industrial 0-4-0s and maybe an industrial 4-wheel diesel or two.

I’ll can try some little 0-6-0s and 2-4-0s etc on the widest radius circuit, which will equate to 1st radius “setrack”.

Here’s the engine I ordered the other day:

…… and another hint for your gradient. Graduate it. ie. GRADUALLY increase the incline over the first 30 cm of track. Not straight into your gradient rise. Otherwise, the middl eloco wheels (usually pickup wheels on a 2-6-2), will lift off the track as you begin going up the gradient. And NEVER NEVER commence the gradient on a curve. Not only will the loco wheels lift of the track if the gradient is to sudden, it WILL derail.

So when planning your gradient, allow for the extra gradual increase/decrease in gradient at either end.

Woodie said:

…… and another hint for your gradient. Graduate it. ie. GRADUALLY increase the incline over the first 30 cm of track. Not straight into your gradient rise. Otherwise, the middl eloco wheels (usually pickup wheels on a 2-6-2), will lift off the track as you begin going up the gradient. And NEVER NEVER commence the gradient on a curve. Not only will the loco wheels lift of the track if the gradient is to sudden, it WILL derail.

So when planning your gradient, allow for the extra gradual increase/decrease in gradient at either end.

Ta.

Bubblecar said:

Woodie said:

Bubblecar said:

Ta :)

But you have to bear in mind this is inevitably going to be a rather “extreme” layout, ‘cos of space restrictions.

Maximum space available is no more than 1 metre by 1.5. So ALL my curve radii are smaller than your prescription as I want this to be a continuous-circuit type of layout.

Which is why I’ll only be running very small locos and 4 wheel wagons. But I’ll heed your warning and make the curves as big as is feasible.

As for the gradient, that’s just for an extra circuit connecting an upper and lower circuit. Might be fun to try it out and see what happens :)

My first was 6’ X 4’ . Did it as a practice one with “one of everything” on it “squeezed” on. Track pretty close to the edges, and an “up’n‘over” incline and decent. taking 3/4 of the “loop” to go up’n‘over. Way to steep. Radius too tight for bogie carriages. derailed. Particularly passenger ones. Looked ridiculous to.
I know you are likely to run steam. 4-6-2 locos with tender will derail on tight radius. 2-4-0 Tank locos might be just OK.

I’ll be running little industrial 0-4-0s and maybe an industrial 4-wheel diesel or two.

I’ll can try some little 0-6-0s and 2-4-0s etc on the widest radius circuit, which will equate to 1st radius “setrack”.

Here’s the engine I ordered the other day:

That will cope with a reasonably tight radius, but doubt it would have the pulling power or the weight for much of an incline. A good heavy weighted loco is needed for decent grip on the tracks. You’ll get wheelspin if the gradient is too steep.

real locos squirt sand onto the track where it meets the wheel to give better traction, they have sand boxes -its compressed air that delivers the sand to the track

the things i worked on briefly were some yank machine with a huge diesel engine with pistons the size of plates, the mechanical energy is changed to electrical energy via an a huge alternator / generator take your pick , the AC wave is rectified, smoothed then chopped via PWM to deliver power to the wheels – the axles hold the motor – have a funny they are 3 phase motors

the wheels have have rpm counters so the loco can detect slip between wheel and track and back off power to the wheels.

mollwollfumble said:

Disabled ramp maximum gradient 1 in 14. That’s a ridiculous law. Wheelchair ramp doesn’t have to be anywhere near that shallow. What do our resident engineers say?

Footpath, a maximum gradient over longer distances of 1 in 14.

On most railways, the steepest grades were 1 in 40. On a few lines, the steepest grades were 1 in 30. Railway gradients are more gentle than most roads, which can have grades as steep as 1 in 6.

Some forklifts have a maximum grade of 1 in 5.

For trucks, 1 in 8 is a recommended maximum.

For driveways, maximum gradient is 1 in 4.

For embankments at the sides of roads, the standard says not to exceed 1 in 3, but that didn’t stop the Qld government for putting the freeway from Brisbane to Gympie in with a very dangerous 1 in 2.5 side slope. Grrr.

Car parked on Baldwin St, Dunedin NZ.

the brain allows driver access, theres a code you need to input to allow the loco to be driven away, then theres the button you press all the time to make sure you aren’t dead at the wheel

when you brake the motors in the axles are turned into generators – electrical energy being created by the motion of wheels is turned into voltage which pumps current into a huge resistor which heats up, large fans blow air over the resistor bank (they call it the toaster i think) to dump energy. so whe the loco brakes it turns forward energy into hot air

You want to avoid this sort of thing with tight radius. This is 29” radius. As well and looking completely unrealistic, this situation will pull the bogies off the tracks. It can also happens with, say 4 wheel coal hoppers, specially those that have buffers. The buffers touch on the curves and pull the carriages off the tracks.

Don’t take any notice of those youtube videos of little logging/mining/industry layouts that seem to go round and round quite happily on a sixpence. They WILL have doctored the carriages and removed the buffers.

Just a few extra notes, Parpyone. Are you using set track? Set track is almost impossible to get a graduated gradient out of. It’s too inflexible. Flextrack is the only way to go for start/end of gradients.

Anything less that 18” radius (preferably absolute minimum of 22”, I learnt the hard way, and will not go below 32” radius now) will severely limit the rollingstock, including locos that you can run. for reasons already explained. Particularly bogie carriages and steam locos. Most bogie carriages do NOT have the rotation range in the bogie to negotiate tight curves. (note the bogies poking out from under the carriage body in that pic). On tight curves the bogie ends/corner will hit under the carriage body and jam there, causing derailments.

Nextly, for n-6-n steam locos, check to ensure the middle driving wheels of the “6” have some lateral (sideways) movement. Remember the 6 “fixed” wheels are in a STRAIGHT line, and you place that on a curve that is too tight, the wheels won’t slot down into a CURVED track if the radius is too tight.

Woodie said:

Just a few extra notes, Parpyone. Are you using set track? Set track is almost impossible to get a graduated gradient out of. It’s too inflexible. Flextrack is the only way to go for start/end of gradients.

Anything less that 18” radius (preferably absolute minimum of 22”, I learnt the hard way, and will not go below 32” radius now) will severely limit the rollingstock, including locos that you can run. for reasons already explained. Particularly bogie carriages and steam locos. Most bogie carriages do NOT have the rotation range in the bogie to negotiate tight curves. (note the bogies poking out from under the carriage body in that pic). On tight curves the bogie ends/corner will hit under the carriage body and jam there, causing derailments.

Nextly, for n-6-n steam locos, check to ensure the middle driving wheels of the “6” have some lateral (sideways) movement. Remember the 6 “fixed” wheels are in a STRAIGHT line, and you place that on a curve that is too tight, the wheels won’t slot down into a CURVED track if the radius is too tight.

Yes I expect I’ll be using flexible track for everything except the turnouts. Ta for the advice & warnings :)

Also going to be pricing DCC. Might seem extravagant on a very small layout but will make things a lot easier.

Bubblecar said:

Woodie said:

Just a few extra notes, Parpyone. Are you using set track? Set track is almost impossible to get a graduated gradient out of. It’s too inflexible. Flextrack is the only way to go for start/end of gradients.

Anything less that 18” radius (preferably absolute minimum of 22”, I learnt the hard way, and will not go below 32” radius now) will severely limit the rollingstock, including locos that you can run. for reasons already explained. Particularly bogie carriages and steam locos. Most bogie carriages do NOT have the rotation range in the bogie to negotiate tight curves. (note the bogies poking out from under the carriage body in that pic). On tight curves the bogie ends/corner will hit under the carriage body and jam there, causing derailments.

Nextly, for n-6-n steam locos, check to ensure the middle driving wheels of the “6” have some lateral (sideways) movement. Remember the 6 “fixed” wheels are in a STRAIGHT line, and you place that on a curve that is too tight, the wheels won’t slot down into a CURVED track if the radius is too tight.

Yes I expect I’ll be using flexible track for everything except the turnouts. Ta for the advice & warnings :)

Just one more, and that will be enough for Woodies Railway Modelling 101. NEVER put a turnout on an incline. Again, you WILL get derailments. Have the turnout level, and that includes a good portion of any lead-in/out track to/from that turnout.

On one of my Youtube binges last week, I came across a small british industrial layout, and had an 0-6-0 going up the beginning of an incline that was not graduated. At the beginning of the incline, the middle wheelset lifted of the track, and they had to hand push it through that bit of track every time. It wasn’t a video to highlight the problem, was just a overall video of a model train show I think. Doubt if I’d ever be able to deliberately find it again.

Bubblecar said:

Also going to be pricing DCC. Might seem extravagant on a very small layout but will make things a lot easier.

Way to go. We’ll chat about that as some stage. Particularly sound capabilities. Also how the decoder control works to maintain the same speed at the same throttle setting regardless of incline/decent or carriage load.

There are layout wiring considerations when using DCC over DC as well. You can also use your phone/tablet/computer as a throttle as well.

mollwollfumble said:

Disabled ramp maximum gradient 1 in 14. That’s a ridiculous law. Wheelchair ramp doesn’t have to be anywhere near that shallow.

why not?

Bubblecar said:

Woodie said:

Bubblecar said:

Ta :)

But you have to bear in mind this is inevitably going to be a rather “extreme” layout, ‘cos of space restrictions.

Maximum space available is no more than 1 metre by 1.5. So ALL my curve radii are smaller than your prescription as I want this to be a continuous-circuit type of layout.

Which is why I’ll only be running very small locos and 4 wheel wagons. But I’ll heed your warning and make the curves as big as is feasible.

As for the gradient, that’s just for an extra circuit connecting an upper and lower circuit. Might be fun to try it out and see what happens :)

My first was 6’ X 4’ . Did it as a practice one with “one of everything” on it “squeezed” on. Track pretty close to the edges, and an “up’n‘over” incline and decent. taking 3/4 of the “loop” to go up’n‘over. Way to steep. Radius too tight for bogie carriages. derailed. Particularly passenger ones. Looked ridiculous to.
I know you are likely to run steam. 4-6-2 locos with tender will derail on tight radius. 2-4-0 Tank locos might be just OK.

I’ll be running little industrial 0-4-0s and maybe an industrial 4-wheel diesel or two.

I’ll can try some little 0-6-0s and 2-4-0s etc on the widest radius circuit, which will equate to 1st radius “setrack”.

Here’s the engine I ordered the other day:

Egad that’s tiny! The detail on it looks quite crisp, despite the diminutive size.

Bubblecar said:

mollwollfumble said:

Disabled ramp maximum gradient 1 in 14. That’s a ridiculous law. Wheelchair ramp doesn’t have to be anywhere near that shallow. What do our resident engineers say?

Footpath, a maximum gradient over longer distances of 1 in 14.

On most railways, the steepest grades were 1 in 40. On a few lines, the steepest grades were 1 in 30. Railway gradients are more gentle than most roads, which can have grades as steep as 1 in 6.

Some forklifts have a maximum grade of 1 in 5.

For trucks, 1 in 8 is a recommended maximum.

For driveways, maximum gradient is 1 in 4.

For embankments at the sides of roads, the standard says not to exceed 1 in 3, but that didn’t stop the Qld government for putting the freeway from Brisbane to Gympie in with a very dangerous 1 in 2.5 side slope. Grrr.

Car parked on Baldwin St, Dunedin NZ.

That’s one in 3. You can see why I object to slopes of 1 in 2.5.

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

mollwollfumble said:

Disabled ramp maximum gradient 1 in 14. That’s a ridiculous law. Wheelchair ramp doesn’t have to be anywhere near that shallow. What do our resident engineers say?

Footpath, a maximum gradient over longer distances of 1 in 14.

On most railways, the steepest grades were 1 in 40. On a few lines, the steepest grades were 1 in 30. Railway gradients are more gentle than most roads, which can have grades as steep as 1 in 6.

Some forklifts have a maximum grade of 1 in 5.

For trucks, 1 in 8 is a recommended maximum.

For driveways, maximum gradient is 1 in 4.

For embankments at the sides of roads, the standard says not to exceed 1 in 3, but that didn’t stop the Qld government for putting the freeway from Brisbane to Gympie in with a very dangerous 1 in 2.5 side slope. Grrr.

Car parked on Baldwin St, Dunedin NZ.

That’s one in 3. You can see why I object to slopes of 1 in 2.5.

From my experience, I don’t think there is any level land in NZ.

PermeateFree said:

From my experience, I don’t think there is any level land in NZ.

That’s a very good point. Certainly not a lot. (Check topographic map). Hamilton perhaps.