my catenary build

Great start Bruce.  I hadn't thought of using the TIG rod.  I am currently using 1/16" diameter brass rod.  Looking forward to your progress.  Mine is on hold at the moment.  

Kind of makes me wish I had electrics.

The 36" rod comes with flattened 1" sections near both ends, which I worked to my advantage.  The first step was to bend the rod at either end of the flat surface, forming U shaped ends as seen here.  This produces a trolley wire length of approximately 32".  Once formed, a rudimentary jig on the 2X4 is produced by simply adding a screw at each top corner. 

Take 2 more rods and cut off the flat section from each end.  The first is placed parallel to the trolley wire with short spacers in between, then solder in place, much the same construction as the crossbars.  Five equally spaced spacers seem sufficient to avoid deformation from pan pressure.  The dark blue lines drawn on the jig, guide the positioning of the spacers.

Solder the spacers and ends into one assembly. 

And finally, place the 3rd rod parallel to the upper rod and solder it at center, above the middle spacer.   Position the 3rd rod end over top of the short angled rod above each screw.  Bend the short angled rod to match the curve of the 3rd rod and solder in place.  A small upright brace at each end adds strength...you could add as many as you like here.  And there you have it, your first stringer.

You'll find the speed of assembly increases with a little practice and repetition .  Here's the perfect way to improve your soldering skills too.  Although every stringer on the layout won't be the same length, I made enough of these standard sized ones to suffice for now. Note that no 2 stringers are exactly alike, but the discrepancies are allowed for in the final assembly.

  Making hangers for the stringers is probably the most precise step of all.  Luckily they are small and easy to make.  Til next time.

Bruce

It's never too late Elliot. 

Nice thread, Bruce. 

I like watching your engineering mind at work.

Dan Padova posted:

Great start Bruce.  I hadn't thought of using the TIG rod.  I am currently using 1/16" diameter brass rod.  Looking forward to your progress.  Mine is on hold at the moment.  

Thanks Dan,

I experimented with brass wire off a spool.....turned into a giant curly mess.  Rod is the way to go.

I was concerned about sagging at the center of each stringer, especially with my extra long spans and no tensioning.  Soldering out of sequence produced a stringer that actually bowed up in the middle.  Still learning as I go.

Bruce

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

Kind of makes me wish I had electrics.

Frankly, Elliot, the thought of installing cat on your entire layout is downright scary!  Not even Pennsy used that much cat.

Bruce

MaxSouthOz posted:

Nice thread, Bruce. 

I like watching your engineering mind at work.

Thanks Max,

It's not neat or precise like store bought cat, but then, producing something economic and more realistic without the use of flimsy materials was the goal.  With about 15 feet already installed, I'm having good results with all my electrics so far. Many details still need ironing out, only adding to my enthusiasm about the project. 

Bruce

Bruce, you may have mentioned what type of soldering tool you are using, but Ill ask anyway.  From one of your photos it looks like an ordinary soldering iron.  I've been using a butane torch with good results.  I wonder if a resistance solderer might do better.  I've been toying with buying one.  

Dan,

At the bench I use a Weller soldering station with adjustable temp.  On the layout, a soldering gun suffices.  Even though the steel is a poor conductor of heat, the copper coating allows for quick, positive solder joints with no special treatment.  I have had to bend the assemblies, and none too delicately, to follow the contour of the track, without busting a single solder joint.........yet.

Bruce

Just found this and am watching as I want to add cat some point to mine, once track is laid.  Are you powering, or is it just for looks?  And I can't wait to see what you do on curves.

Bruce:

Thank you for this thread. It will help demystify the process for the rest of us.

Good evening all:

Bruce, very nice work and excellent instructions.  I'd also be curious how you go about powering your system (or plan to) and which motors you have.

Before I post the following, I wanted to say that it is not my intent diminish anyone's work with my own.  Seeing Bruce's system excited me enough to want to share a piece of my own, and add that there is another nutcase O modeler in the world that loves designing and building working catenary systems.

I'd like to humbly submit that using copper wire can work, and can be quite enjoyable if you're into such challenges.  I am building a small system where the wire structure and catenary supports are modeled after Amtrak's Euro style above New Haven.  The cat poles and support structure uses common hardware and are not really 'modeled'.  The point is to create a realistic and heavy duty system to run electrics and perform some operations.

I use brass rod from Lowe's for the cat supports, and 18g copper wire for the messenger and trolley wire.  The wire is under fairly high tension, which is adjustable and secured at various 'pull-off points' around the system.  DCS controls the system through a custom switch-board.  There are 5 isolated overhead circuits.  A stripped Atlas AEM7 is the test vehicle, (see LEDs on the roof).  AEM7s, MUs and a TRAXX F140 are the intended users

Bruce -- Thanks for sharing your work and ideas.  Its really fun to see different designs and follow what others are doing.  I'm eager to see how your system progresses.

--NMM

--NMM, I'm impressed by the robustness of your system.  Your method of building the masts is quite unique and very resourceful.  I'm guessing the masts are 3/8" bolt rod.  I also like your method of attachment to the table.  

Hi Dan:

Thank you.  The track plan is somewhere around 75ft +/-, enough that, like Bruce, the materials need to be inexpensive and locally acquired.  Everything but the wire is from Lowe's or HD, including the 3/8-24 threaded rod you correctly noted.  The 125ft 18g copper spool is from SmallParts.  All of the cat support masts are bolted to the table over a metal plate.  Otherwise the wire tensioning would bend the supports into the benchwork.  Some days progress was '3 steps forward, 2.9 steps fixing things you should have foreseen.'  I'm typically not inclined to share projects until they are more operational, but after Bruce's post I couldn't help myself.

Pantenary posted:

Hi Dan:

Thank you.  The track plan is somewhere around 75ft +/-, enough that, like Bruce, the materials need to be inexpensive and locally acquired.  Everything but the wire is from Lowe's or HD, including the 3/8-24 threaded rod you correctly noted.  The 125ft 18g copper spool is from SmallParts.  All of the cat support masts are bolted to the table over a metal plate.  Otherwise the wire tensioning would bend the supports into the benchwork.  Some days progress was '3 steps forward, 2.9 steps fixing things you should have foreseen.'  I'm typically not inclined to share projects until they are more operational, but after Bruce's post I couldn't help myself.

 

 

Thank you for posting your catenary project, also. Yours is yet another good solution to the task of overhead wiring.

I'm going to stick to 3-rail

Nice work Gents. I love the creativity

"I'm typically not inclined to share projects until they are more operational, but after Bruce's post I couldn't help myself."....PANTENARY

I'm glad you did share your work during it's construction.  Doing so enables others to gain more insight into your methods.  Pictures, as they say, are worth a thousand words.  

So, I'm curious about the attachment of the standoffs to the masts.  Do you think you can post a close up photo of the connection ?

Hi Dan:

I'd be more than happy to.  What I'll do is start a new thread to detail some of the construction particulars.  Look for that in the next couple days.  I finally got the last of the electronic components for the control board...I'd like to start some of that yet tonight. 

Wow!  Talk about bullet proof catenary.  I'm also glad you joined in, Nate. 

I see how you treated the messenger/trolley wire by dividing the curves sections it into short straights.  I had considered this initially, but decided on curving the wires to look more prototypical.  Luckily, most of my curves are hidden in tunnels so very little realistic curved cat needs to be built.   I was also concerned about the narrow width of some scale pantograph pickup shoes slipping off the wire in curves....the new Visionline GG1, in particular.  They are plastic (ugh!) and of the wrong design for a G. ( ugh X 2 )

I took a break from catenary construction to prepare for an unexpected guest visit by cleaning up the entire layout room.  We did a amateur comparison test between 3 scale GG1's in my roster.  One ERR upgraded MTH, one PS3 MTH and the VL.  All equally smooth runners and powerful enough for long drags, but the VL sounds really are spectacular.  Directing the sounds of deploying pans, arcing and coupler firing to the corresponding speakers at either end, gets heads turning.  Audiophools.....er, philes would be impressed!

Bruce

Hi Bruce:

Regarding the curves, your choice is perfect for the elegant Pennsy catenary you are modelling.  I actually did the same on a layout in a previous abode.  I also used 18g wire there, with the aux and trolley separated by a small copper 'blip' soldered in between them to simulate the connecting clamp.  It took forever to build that way.  I decided my next system would be a bit more 'time efficient', as to actually run trains yet in my lifetime.

I am replicating the Amtrak structure you can see above New Haven to Boston:

My wire and direct cat supports are built against this picture, and the cat supports are electrically insulated from the cat poles.  The straight sections you see in my curves are all one wire strung around the curve, pulled off and then mechanically tensioned at opposite ends of a wire run, (out of frame).  The pic below is an example pull-off.  The wire tension bends 3/8" rod bolted to 3/4 benchwork with 2 metal base plates above and below.  This is by design and the best way I found to keep the wire path in curves true.

I understand your pantograph concerns, and planned ahead for that problem.  Another reason for the 'straight-wire-in-curves' design was to encourage even pantograph shoe wear at speed.  The issue of course was to keep the pans under wire.  Stock pantograph shoes are about as wide as O gauge outer rails, as determined by those on Atlas O AEM7s and the long shoe of an MTH TRAXX 140.  This became my template and I needed only to ensure the wire path stayed within the corresponding outer rail gauge.  I was able to approximate the wire path using sewing thread and nails in the gauge along the entire track plan in a zig-zag pattern:

I erected the cat poles roughly 5 inches away from the center rail where the nails were.  I then used the dummy AEM7 with a stock pan to measure height and width and ensure the wire path was right.  The design of the cat support and poles allowed for adjustments along any axis to bring the wire path into line.

The final protection against "pantograph wander" is to build my own shoes out of brass, which are slightly longer than 'strict O scale'.  They will replace the stock heads on the motors I run.  I'm in the middle of that project right now, along with the control board.

Sounds like you had fun comparing GG1s.  I haven't run them yet on this system, but I would want to do a very slow test.  Even using O63 curves, a decent GG1 may push its pan out from under my wire in the curves.  I've tried to build this so anyone's equipment can run, but I can only test for sure against pans I have.

As far as the sound goes, I've been quite pleased at MTH's sound board, at least in the TRAXX and new AEM7s; accurate and clear at higher volumes.  My rail space isn't large, but the acoustics are decent.

Nate,

Most all the scale GG1's need a minimum curve of 072.  If you can avoid the 063's, then running anything that's made won't be a problem.

With the use of the TIG rod, there's little need of tensioning to keep the trolley wire taught, so I avoided having to over-build the supports.  It also allows for further distances between support poles along straight track, opposed to the store bought stuff, giving better access to the trains, if needed.  While I see the need for more support in the curves, the ability to bend the trolley wire and have it keep its shape, simplifies assembly greatly.  More on that when I update my progress.

I'm still debating whether to convert the fleet for live catenary, especially when doing so is close to impossible on certain engines.   I can conveniently leave that decision for later, when the layout work load becomes lighter.  Does that day ever come?

Your construction method sure does produce sturdy assemblies.  Now that you've pictured the type cat you are replicating, I'm amazed at how authentic it looks.  I initially thought the design was all your own...but instead, it's prototypical!  The consequences of having a PRR head stuck in 1950.  Of course, when you reside over 500 miles away from modern live catenary, the chance to view real high speed rail electric equipment is close to nil.  I hear there's an Google for that.

Bruce

Bruce and Nate:

I am enjoying this thread immensely and admiring the work both of you are doing. I am a PRR modeler and have a GG1 in my motive power fleet among many PRR steam locomotives. I have been wanting, for years, to install catenary in my layout. Thank you both for sharing your solutions to the project.

One of my main dilemmas is that my two main tracks go under an existing 10 foot long tunnel that is not removable. I do have a small access space at the back side of the tunnel to remove derailments. Did either of you have a similar problem? If so, how did you solve it?

I have mentally wrestled with the problem of whether to power electric locomotives from overhead power through the catenary (if I ever get off my butt and install it) or not. After much deliberation, I have come to the conclusion that viewers of the layout will see the engine running with its pantograph up and not care whether or not it is running from overhead power. This will solve the problem of rewiring your electric locomotives to accept overhead power. The visual effect will be sufficient.

Randy,

  It really depends on how the tunnel is constructed inside.  If you have a tunnel lining, then things become overly complicated. 

I plan to illustrate my tunnel treatment soon.  Rather than full cat wire assemblies, only the 2 messenger wires over each track will continue into the tunnel.  Attachment to the layout will simply be vertical TIG rod hangers inserted into portal ceilings and wooden frames spanning the internal tracks.  The tight fit tolerances I get by inserting the rod into a predrilled hole of correct size, assists in holding in place the initial alignments and levellings.  To permanently attach, mark posititions and remove the hangers and messenger wire, epoxy the hanger holes and reassemble.  Solder the messenger to the hangers and enjoy.

Transitions in heights of the messenger wire are as necessary in our compressed little worlds as with 1:1.  Fortunately, most of the pantographs on our models operate under spring loading, so they follow a dipping wire until almost fully collapsed.  Pennsy through the Hudson River tube barely had room for the pans of a GG1, even after the tunnel was modified to fit their modern electric fleet.  So goes it with other obstructions to catenary like overpasses, bridges and even signals.  While the majority of the line will have messenger wire just low enough to place pressure against the pans, transition sections in advance of obstructions will smoothly collapse pans to lower than normal....and again raise them to normal upon exiting.

Pantographs on real Pennsy equipment could deploy much higher than normally replicated in scale by our models.  I have a pair of old 2 rail BB1's that can extend that tall...I've found they are an exception.

Hope that helps somewhat until I get back to posting.

Bruce

Randy Harrison posted:

 

I have mentally wrestled with the problem of whether to power electric locomotives from overhead power through the catenary (if I ever get off my butt and install it) or not. After much deliberation, I have come to the conclusion that viewers of the layout will see the engine running with its pantograph up and not care whether or not it is running from overhead power. This will solve the problem of rewiring your electric locomotives to accept overhead power. The visual effect will be sufficient.

As I plod along, the same thoughts have crossed my mind many times.  It eventually boiled down to building in the ability to electrify if I please or leave as is, it costs no more.  A few well placed cuts and I can bust stretches into blocks, or use the cat specifically for signalling circuits.  I've heard the Lionel offerings in the past with automatic pans are difficult to make work under wire anyway.  The benefits of center rail power through the cat might not be immediately obvious, but I can live without it for now.

Bruce

Good morning all:

Bruce -- Please forgive my lack of specificity; my ruling curve is O63.  This was a regrettable compromise for the space I had available to me, and the broadest curve I could reasonably get away with.  The outside staging track, which hugs the mainline curve in one of the pictures above, is O72, as are the wye turnouts in the yard, which also contains a few #7 turnouts.  Hence, the aforementioned scale GG1s would only be able to test there.  You're welcome to stop by any time!  I'll post a track plan in my own thread sometime this week.

As far as prototypicality goes, it has usually been my practice to closely model the wire construction and immediate catenary support structure against a prototype, while employing my own designs for the extended support structure and poles.  That allows me to be creative on the extended structure to support catenary-powered trains as needed, while staying faithful to the prototype where the 'shoe meets the wire'.  My previous catenary layout got a little out of hand with support structure, so I endeavored to be as efficient as possible with poles and supports.  You'll see in subsequent pictures where poles serve multiple purposes, which makes things look more tidy and elegant.

I actually have the old Pennsy mainline about 9.5 minutes north of my house, which is probably one of the reasons I got hooked on heavy electric modelling.  Pennsy engineering is the standard and seldom bested even with today's 'technology'.

Randy -- I've not wired a tunnel before, but I concur with Bruce's plan.  That seems like a juicy challenge to tackle; the harder the better.  And all the more fun when a solution is realized!

I understand both of your views with regard to powering trains with the overhead.  To me, an overhead catenary system isn't doing it's job or even worth it's own existence if it's not powering trains.  I suppose it's the engineer in me, or a quirk or personality that I get such a charge out of difficult technical challenges and insist on a high level of purposeful operation.  It is at the same time frustrating and great fun to get the wire in line, build durable pantographs using conductive grease while ensuring they are sprung properly, reverse-engineering available locomotives where needed to run smoothly off overhead, and generally performing all the wire maintenance or repairs needed, just like the real catenary maintenance crews do.  It could scarcely get better than that for me. 

By the way Bruce, which BB1 are you referring to?  I found some Lionel BB1 pantographs on eBay that I'd like to use for an MU set I have, but am unsure if they are fit for such service.  The guy says they are metal, but he hasn't been great on further details. 

Nate,

The BB1's are/were 2 rail brass offerings from N J International.  I have added pickup rollers and a reverse unit for 3 rail use, but much remains to be done before they're ready for service.  Note the extended reach of the pantograph and the spindly phosphor bronze wire construction. 

I haven't heard of any bad experiences with the Lionel BB1's.  Like the MTH version, the bodies are cast metal, which was probably necessary to add sufficient traction.  There's a "not so local" train shop that has one of Lionel's first offerings still sitting on the shelf.  At full retail + price, it'll probably be there for another 12 years.

Thought I'd add this to illustrate how high the real things can extend.

brwebster posted:

Nate,

The BB1's are/were 2 rail brass offerings from N J International.  I have added pickup rollers and a reverse unit for 3 rail use, but much remains to be done before they're ready for service.  Note the extended reach of the pantograph and the spindly phosphor bronze wire construction. 

I haven't heard of any bad experiences with the Lionel BB1's.  Like the MTH version, the bodies are cast metal, which was probably necessary to add sufficient traction.  There's a "not so local" train shop that has one of Lionel's first offerings still sitting on the shelf.  At full retail + price, it'll probably be there for another 12 years.

Thought I'd add this to illustrate how high the real things can extend.

Your brass BB1's are superb models. If you have them set up for 3 - rail operation, they would be my choice for running. I have a very close friend that had a pair of the early Lionel BB1's and had nothing but trouble with them. Their slow speed was "jerky". He returned them for store credit and got other equipment instead.

NJCJOE posted:

It's never too late Elliot. 

Oh yeah it is Joe. Bruce gets it.

Actually, I have been hanging overhead wire, but just to help with TMCC signal.

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

NJCJOE posted:

It's never too late Elliot. 

Oh yeah it is Joe. Bruce gets it.

Actually, I have been hanging overhead wire, but just to help with TMCC signal.

Overhead wire to improve TMCC signal?   Ding ding ding!  We have another purpose for catenary.  Thanks, Elliot! 

Bruce

All:

I have not forgotten to post some more info on the system I am building.  Time has been short supply for such things lately.

I did have a chance to upload some videos of my old Pennsy-based system from 2007 or so.  The wire and immediate supports were modeled after the old Pennsy main.  The extended supports were, well, practical at best.  The system started as a single track O27 pastime.  It morphed into a double-track O27/O42 monstrosity.  It wasn't well planned out, and crude in places.  Life happened, and that system is only a memory.  I'd like to think the new system now employs all the lessons I learned then, and is a bit more elegant.

--NMM

Good evening all:

I just posted a test run video of the 300 Loft catenary system.  Please forgive me for interrupting this thread again, but just wanted to share with those who could appreciate it.

Thanks.

I certainly don't mind, Nate.  It's great learning about other methods of skinning a cat.  Sorry for the delay in work progress.  Some nagging preliminaries needed to be taken care of before I could continue...updated on the "what did you do on your layout today" topic.

Bruce

Good afternoon Bruce and all:

At long last, I finished the write-up on the catenary system I have been working on.  Please forgive it's length, but hopefully some will find it enjoyable.

Thanks, have a great weekend.

Bruce do you have any updates or new photos of your catenary?  I have been gathering materials to start mine and am looking for any further help or thoughts you may have.  The TIG rod is a big $ savings over the brass I was considering.

Thanks, John