Need Advice on Our New Bascule Bridge Project

That is awsome.

Mikey

That’s a very nice looking bridge.
Should there not be a counter weigh?

Weston

Weston, there are counterweights on the sides as in the picture. Otherwise, it wouldn't be so easy to lift the bridge with a small motor like this.

I'm impressed! That looks great!
If I may suggest, A grooved cable drum so the cable will wind evenly and won't wind on itself until it starts back the other direction.
The two drums will have to be grooved opposite of each other. 1 for the right side and 1 for the left.

Jayhawk500, thanks for your suggestion, yes a grooved cable drum would be a better solution but not easy to manufacture for hundreds of kits. Instead, I fixed the pulleys to make an angle with the inner side of the drums so that when they start turning they wrap the ropes side by side.

Holy Cannoli!   And, welcome to OGR Harun!

@HarunYamanlar  Welcome to OGR!  I really like the aspect of your design process of soliciting feedback on designs before releasing your finished product.  The bridge design and aesthetics are great.  I've also checked out your website.  Very cool.

So here's a question.  What are your thoughts about how end users would make height adjustments to the piers at the ends of this bridge to accommodate different brands of O gauge track?

In other words, Gargraves, Ross, MTH, Lionel, Menards; Tubular, with or without built-in roadbed, etc.  there's some slight variation in heights from the bottom of these different types of track to the top of their rails.  Height adjustments may be necessary at the piers, especially if one type of track is used to traverse the bridge span and another type meets up with it over the end piers.  Have you designed the piers such that a lower profile track type (either over the span or joining from the outside) could be shimmed up to meet track with a higher profile?

@SteveH, thanks for welcoming me to your great forum.

I didn't understand the problem quite well, maybe because my English is not enough to catch the nuance. But if I understood correctly there won't be a problem as we will not supply the tracks and users will use their own tracks on the bridge as well. So there won't be a different height on the bridge and on the piers. Am I correct?

nice laser cut bridge

After thinking about this some more, I thought of an easy solution to my question.  But to better explain my question, I'll put it another way.

Let's say for example that a customer wanted to use this bridge in a ravine between 2 embankments, like a river would run through.  Hypothetically, the two piers at each end of the bridge would be nestled into the river banks.  In which case, the customer may want to use one type of track without a built-in roadbed (like Gargraves, Ross, or traditional tubular 3-rail) to cross the main bridge spans (traversing the 3 piers).  Leading up to the bridge on both sides, the customer may want to use a different type of track with a pre-formed (built-in) roadbed (like Lionel FasTrack or MTH ScaleTrax).  Both of these types of tracks with built-in roadbed have a taller profile than Gargraves.  The red line in this picture illustrates the track height differences:

My question is how would a customer easily match [the heights of the taller profile tracks leading into the bridge from the outside] to the [lower profile height of whatever type of track is chosen to span the length of the bridge] ?

The simplest ways I can think of, would be to raise the bottom of the center pier (or lower the two outer piers) enough so that the tops of the rails on the track spanning the bridge match the tops of the rails of the adjoining tracks.  Shims could be added to the tops of the end piers beneath the track spanning between the 3 piers.  Something like this:

So, in conclusion, modification to your existing design is unnecessary to accommodate different track heights.  Installation details can account for this scenario.

Thank you for indulging this thought exercise.

@SteveH, Now I understood your concern. Yes, lowering the piers and adding shims will solve the problem. Thanks.

I have to say, your engine house model is very detailed both on the inside and the outside. I've seen a couple of reviews on Youtube. The bascule bridge is an awesome idea. Here are a few ideas that I think could improve your model:

-Include an insulated rail that could keep trains from diving into a river or off the layout. Lionel's old postwar bascule bridge has this feature.

-Do you have plans to make a double track version of the bridge? That would be great.

-Will the bridge be able to be operated with either Lionel Legacy or MTH DCS? That is a must.

Harun,

You have come up with a good method of enhancing your ideas. I think you have done a great job with the bridge.

like the gusset plates detail, you should consider adding more of them.

also, the track base truss should match connection points with the side panel points of the side trusses.

add side windows so the bridge operators can see approaching ships.

@Dylan the Train Man, thanks for your suggestions.

I'll try to reply as below.

1. Include an insulated rail that could keep trains from diving into a river or off the layout. Lionel's old postwar bascule bridge has this feature.

This will be a universal kit so we will not supply the tracks with it. Even if we want to include it and as we are in Istanbul, Turkey it's not possible to stock tracks from various brands.

2. Do you have plans to make a double track version of the bridge? That would be great.

Yes, of course, but the question is "when" as there are some other projects in the queue.

3. Will the bridge be able to be operated with either Lionel Legacy or MTH DCS? That is a must.

A similar answer to your first suggestion. We will include a control panel for sure like we do with our working kits. But there is only one motor with a very low current need, below 1 amp, an accessory decoder from any brand or controller can be used to control the bridge.

There are 2 stop/security switches that cut the current to the motor when raised to the top or lowered to the bottom.

Similar control panel but with one toggle switch as below.

@AlanRail posted:

...also, the track base truss should match connection points with the side panel points of the side trusses.

Alan  I think you're right about this.  To put it another way, it's good engineering practice when designing trusses to ensure that the end points of the structural members in horizontal planes intersect the end points of the structural members in the vertical planes. This provides a stronger and more rigid structure in the real world.  Aesthetically, I also gives a more symmetrical appearance.

@AlanRail, thanks.

There will be lots of gusset plates for all connections. And they all will be embossed.

I will add side windows as you suggested. A very rational suggestion, thanks.

really cool would-be  two sets of corner windows at each front corner.

one more suggestion structurally the bridge cable connection would be at the next panel point as well.

just move the connector to the LEFT--- a bit to hit the panel point.

I was a structural engineer in a past life!!

@AlanRail, like this?

CORRECT!

instead of lifting at a single beam you employ the entire truss.

good engineering............. the bridge engineers will be proud!

Very cool looking and operating bridge. Great suggestions as well.  Will there be lights added for operation and aesthetics for night view?  Will there be varying length options?

I understand the reason for leaving out track but it begs some questions:

1) Do you have access to the major brands of track so you can ensure you have supports in the right places where we can attach our track?

2) will there be a hidden power jumper that will allow us to get a feed to the moving bridge track, that we will mount?

3) can you provide a normally closed contact (SPST NC or SPDT) that will open when the bridge starts to raise so we can use it to cut power to the approach tracks as Dylan mentioned?

Also, as you may have seen in other posts, the ability of an operating bridge that has sufficient length and the ability to go towards 90 degrees vertical would allow its use as a way to enter into a layout without bending down and crawling under a fixed bridge!  The addition of a small spring could keep it from going to far backwards and causing the cords to jump off the pulleys.

Look forward to see more about this.

@Sparty1225, I'm thinking to add the lights we made for our engine house on the front and back walls of the operator's room.

Various length options? To be honest, not at the moment as I have to finish some other projects. At least I have to start drawing this kit for HO now.

since you are NOT suppling the track, not sure why you should do any electrical contact work for any track.

power cutoffs are easy to control by placing a micro-switch triggered by the bridge raising and lowering.

This topic was closed by the Mods after a discussion with the OP.  It may re-open at a later date but member profile security is OGR's prime concern.