Superelevation - Does everyone here do it?

I think very few do superelevation.

I do, but I believe I am in the minority.  Using Fastrack and superelevating with HO or N cork roadbed on outside/inside of curves.

The largest curved modules in our Independent Hi-Railers, Midwest Division modular layout are super-elevated. The transition into and out of the super-elevated portion of the curve is VERY important, just like the real railroad.

I tinkered with it with tubular track, but I didn't see any significant advantage, and of course it's more work.

What would be the advantage of super elevation?  In HO a typical superelevation would be 1/32" if my math is correct.  i would think most modelers would have a hard time keeping the normal cross level +/- 1/32".  In O gauge, most of us are no where near the radius curves the railroads use.  Since super elevation in O gauge is not a passenger comfort issue, and it is going to increase the problem of pulling cars off the inside of a curve, what would be the advantage?  The thing that would probably be useful to adopt in model trains would be proper spirals entering curves.

Yup, I do it only for looks.  The small amount of superelevation that I use has no discernable effect on performance, but is just noticeable.  It wasn't hard to do using the two sizes of cork roadbed. 

   To my eyes, it adds a lot - I spend more time watching the trains roll than actually working on the layout.  When I go downstairs to the layout, I fire up the trains, and then enjoy watching for a while before working - so I many never finish!  But that's OK.

I've never considered it.  There are many surveying and layout techniques that would be too much of a pain to bother with, for little result.  You'd run out of room quick.  I remember from one of my college courses (civil engineering major) that horizontal curves are mathematical spirals.  I don't remember what the vertical curves were, but for roads, they were parabolas.

I also use easements.  For O-60 diameter curves, I use O-72 easements and O-72 turnouts.  I enjoy the effect, though subtle.

I superelevated all my mainline track (Gargraves) using wood shims.  It is subtle but noticeable:

David

Think your math is  off..

That would only be 48/32or 1 1/2 inches of elevation.

think the elevation was a function of degree of curvature but typically about 6 to 8 inches, as I remember. That would be  closer to 3 /16 of an inch in O scale. Have the PRR track construction manuals and can look it up if anyone is interested.

I've done super-elevation in HO and N scale for better appearance on curves. Haven't bothered with it in O because most of my track is loose-laid and subject to change. In O-gauge, the newer fast-angle wheels have enough wheel taper to cant cars into curves.

Yes, I do it on my wider diameter, higher speed curves, only a slight amount, maybe about 1 mm difference inside to outside - about a 3% slope.

My guess is that relatively few do it.  In most cases, given the modest size of the majority of O gauge layouts, it really isn't necessary and doesn't lead to any significant operational enhancement.

I tried it by running a piece of 14 gauge wire under the ties on the outside of curves. While it looked nice, I experienced operating problems like opening couplers, binding so I took it out and the problem went away. I use O-27 profile tubular no less than 42" curve.

I've done it in a couple of spots where the curve is just single track, and I really like it.  I may have to give the shim idea a try. 

I do not have it on my current layout, but have done so in the past.  Like Ahitpy, I ran insulated wire beneath the ties on one layout, but did have similar problems.  On another layout it was trouble-free and looked great.  Based on these experiences, I believe you need to have transitions, pretty wide curves and no 'S' curves to make it work.  To answer the question, "Why do you need it?" - you don't; it doesn't enhance operation at all, it just looks great as in the pictures posted.

I tried it several years back. I had some issue with some grinding sounds out of a few of my engines as they went around so I dismantled the elevated curves---but it did look cool.

Scott Smith

I did it and took it out when my Acela didn't like it at high speeds. The transition point was issue

wsdimenna - I assume by "transition" you are referring to the point where the superelevation starts or stops?  If so, I agree, that's a problem:  The S.E. needs to go partway into the next straight.  And on a smaller layout, that puts you almost to the next curve!  So your train is practically rockin' and rollin' like some of the "poor track videos" we've seen here.

I did it by accident. The roadbed on an 054 curve, (using L-Girder benchwork & risers with plywood and then homasote underneath Gargraves track) was a smidge low on the inside. The track looked good but I couldn't detect any difference in operation between trains on that curve and another one on a lower level where the roadbed was dead-on flat. 

Still on the fence about implementing in the layout we're currently building. But purely for aesthetics. Ironically, from memory I think I read in John Armstrong's book that real railroads rarely use it because they need to be able to come to a complete stop anywhere along the line and having a train stopped and tilted is just tempting providence.

A lot of really bad information here.  The only reason for super elevation is it looks good. And it does. 6" is the high speed prototype norm and that works out to 1/8" or the height of an N scale foam roadbed. No operational problems at all if, as Hot Water says,  you take care of the vertical as well as the lateral easements.

 

 

Whew!  What an education in response to my question.  So, what have I learned.

1) Done correctly, superelevation can really look great in O gauge.  Terrific shots John and wbg pete.

2) There can be problems with superelevation, especially, it seems, in the transition zones.

3) It seems many, many modelers get by fine without it.

4) I'm not nearly as good a modeler as I need to be to attempt doing superelevation.  Hence, I'll be a "flat" guy for now.

 

Thanks so much for the education and the great pictures.

Ron

My family chose superelevation because it looked neat.  While we were building the layout, whenever someone finished a popsicle the popsicle stick went under the outside edge of the ties.  We have never had any problems.  We use Gargraves track and run a mix of postwar, MPC, and new Lionel. 

My layout is far too small to fool with it. Anyway I tried it once on a 15x25 layout during the '90s by placing a#12 insulated wire under the outer tie edge of 096/084 curves. It had the"look" but made no appreciable operating difference for me otherwise. Okay for those who have the room and want the prototypical appearance. 

Easements are probably more important and most certainly contribute to the overall look of the layout.  I used foam roadbed and am just now starting to ballast.  I may tighten down some of the inner screws and see if I can get a nice even transition in and out.  Currently, my track allows the trains to run very fast.  Certainly over 100 SMPH.  Don't want to lose that by messing up a superevalation transition.

 

Mike

I have some prewar or perhaps postwar track which appears to be close to 031, where the metal ties are tiered or stacked. Hard to see manufacturer name if its there at all. And yes, it works very well.

Out of practicality for keeping my engine from flying off the track.  I use superelevation on my O42 elevated curves.  This is O27 track.  I have two main lines that are elevated over a 15' section of the table.  Turning in an O42 curve proved dangerous and so I placed shims under the outside support edge of the support trestles.  I simply fiddled with them until I found the right amount of elevation and a smooth transition.  Actually, it works pretty well and operationally was very important for the safety of my equipment.  (No math involved.)

I did it about 20 years ago on my (still) current layout. Easy enough to do with thin

wood or cardboard shims. Some of my workmanship was not the best (learning...),

some still looks sharp, and it is a cheap and easy way to get a nice effect. There are 2 curves on my layout where I plan to remove it - it's not really visible and my previously mentioned early workmanship has caused an occasional derailment of long-wheelbase steamers. A couple, occasionally.

 

Remember, a little goes a long way, and the easement area from flat to tilted needs to be

done well. (Voice of experience.)

It's a subtle thing, but it can be really convincing.