TalMaggio Acres Office Layout

John,

that sounds like a good plan to setup the small layout to run some trains while you contemplate your larger layout.  I'm looking forward to seeing your progress!

For those

John D. posted:

Don't have any photo editing software on this laptop, so I can't post an image.

SCARM allows saving images of the layout in .bmp and .jpg format using the File/Export option. To make things easier for folks who might want to comment I'm including 3 images. The first is the full-size room, the second is a close-up of the office section and the third is just the layout area. Note that I turned things 90° and moved them to the 0:0 coordinates. Because computer displays are usually rectangular, I find it easier to orient my designs with the widest part on the horizontal (X) axis to get more on the screen.

As far as the layout itself goes, I see some "S" curves that may present problems. Otherwise, the runs are pretty simple dog bones to let 3 trains run unattended.

Having a railroad laboratory is fun. I think it would be easiest to just work with ovals and add-in switches to change lines, a crossover track and a passing siding.

That will keep you busy isolating lines and controlling it for conventional operation. Then, add-in a command system. 

I have a 22.5° crossover between to lines that are on separate power districts. The outside switches to crossover the inside line and enter a two track staging spur. I had to isolate the center diamond to prevent the separate power districts from bridging. FasTrack has the diamond wired. GG, Atlas do not. Ross may have wired now. Depends on the age. MTH RealTrax is connected.

So, you can see what you can learn from what seems to be a simple track arrangement.

Between the forum and your club members you'll shorten all of learning curves. It's like anything else, if you do it, then you own it.

Good luck with your new home!

DoubleDAZ posted:

For those

John D. posted:

Don't have any photo editing software on this laptop, so I can't post an image.

SCARM allows saving images of the layout in .bmp and .jpg format using the File/Export option. 

 

Tried that, but the bmp was HUGE (4MB) and only let me do the whole basement.  What you posted is exactly what I wanted to post.  Thanks!

Moonman posted:

Having a railroad laboratory is fun. I think it would be easiest to just work with ovals and add-in switches to change lines, a crossover track and a passing siding.

That will keep you busy isolating lines and controlling it for conventional operation. Then, add-in a command system. 

I have a 22.5° crossover between to lines that are on separate power districts. The outside switches to crossover the inside line and enter a two track staging spur. I had to isolate the center diamond to prevent the separate power districts from bridging. FasTrack has the diamond wired. GG, Atlas do not. Ross may have wired now. Depends on the age. MTH RealTrax is connected.

So, you can see what you can learn from what seems to be a simple track arrangement.

Between the forum and your club members you'll shorten all of learning curves. It's like anything else, if you do it, then you own it.

Good luck with your new home!

 

My fear with ovals as opposed to these dogbones is the reach and the space.  I want to keep it narrow at the bench. 

I'm thinking of some crossovers and/or sidings to allow for variety.

I'm actually now thinking of pulling out the middle loop and putting a siding on the other two loops. It would be less cluttered but only two trains could run at once.  Three loops let me have 3 trains at once.  If I can cram a siding on one of the loops I can still have four trains.

John D. posted: 

 Tried that, but the bmp was HUGE (4MB) and only let me do the whole basement.  What you posted is exactly what I wanted to post.  Thanks!

Good point about the bmp and the jpg is also over 1mb given the size of your room.

Anyway, not sure what version of Windows you're using, but they all come with Paint, though I don't know how large those files would be. You might want to check into the Snipping Tool that's been included since Win 7, it's what I use. It lets you capture any part of the screen and also mark it up to highlight specific items. I used to do a simple screen capture until someone here mentioned the Snipping Tool.

DoubleDAZ posted:

John D. posted: 

 Tried that, but the bmp was HUGE (4MB) and only let me do the whole basement.  What you posted is exactly what I wanted to post.  Thanks!

Good point about the bmp and the jpg is also over 1mb given the size of your room.

Anyway, not sure what version of Windows you're using, but they all come with Paint, though I don't know how large those files would be. You might want to check into the Snipping Tool that's been included since Win 7, it's what I use. It lets you capture any part of the screen and also mark it up to highlight specific items. I used to do a simple screen capture until someone here mentioned the Snipping Tool.

I'm on vacation and only have the work laptop.  When I get home I have more options.  This laptop only has a mostly-working version of windows and chrome.  They only want me to remote desktop to my work machine.  I don't even have Word or PowerPoint.  

Opening the 4MB BMP in paint caused it to crash.  The snipping tool is ok, but the screen is kind of small and snipping it might not have been the greatest resolution.  After the crash, I gave up and went with the PDF.  I appreciate your help!

John,

here, I fit your layout. There is a possible collision risk when entering and leaving the ends. The center rail spacing is ~ 3 7/8"- 4", as you had it, on the straights.

3 trains running and a siding in the top bone

Moonman posted:

John,

here, I fit your layout. There is a possible collision risk when entering and leaving the ends. The center rail spacing is ~ 3 7/8"- 4", as you had it, on the straights.

3 trains running and a siding in the top bone

Cool! do you mean there is STILL a collision risk or are you saying you fixed it? 

THANKS!

John D. posted:

  I appreciate your help!

That's my only intent.

I like your idea to eliminate the inside loop2loop in favor of adding more operational elements, like a siding. I don't know how much you use the office for work-related tasks, but I would think running 3 trains simultaneously might be a bit on the noisy side depending on the track and roadbed you use.

When it comes to collision potential, I'd look at places like those I circled in Red. Your straights are less that 4" apart and while that will work for the straights, the overhang coming out of the O36 curves might result in a collision with anything passing at the juncture.

The office is just a fancy way of saying computer room. In the mornings I might do some work while I have coffee, but most of the time will be playing with trains or surfing the web...

John D. posted:

Moonman posted:

John,

here, I fit your layout. There is a possible collision risk when entering and leaving the ends. The center rail spacing is ~ 3 7/8"- 4", as you had it, on the straights.

3 trains running and a siding in the top bone

Cool! do you mean there is STILL a collision risk or are you saying you fixed it? 

THANKS!

I believe that there still is a collision risk. I only corrected fitment.

John,

Here's a similar track plan using a balloon shape rather than a reversing loop. It should fit in the space. I tried to create a baseboard (deck). 3 trains running, 1 siding and less s-curving. 4.5" center to center spacing.

This bow-tie is something like Atlas uses for it's York display.

John:

Plan for the future. We have a home layout with O-32 curves and are now sorry that we did not use wider curve diameters. We have restricted ourselves to semi scale locomotives (which we love and will still run) but also would now like the capability to run scale equipment. Semi scale will run and look nicely on wider turns, but, larger locomotives will NOT run on smaller diameter curves.

I've noted you have S turns without a straight track between them.

  On most 3 rail,  it doesn't matter as much as it does smaller scales (or 3rs), but it does matter and a few Og will derail, even for forward only. Its the coupler length and lead arcs that conflict causing binding. A small straight (4-5") should always go between opposing curves if you can help it, and I think you can fit them. (E.g. even at 0-36, a Marx E-7 El Capitan will derail right away on a back-2-back S-curves like those).

A curved siding? I'd think about a straight one. Adds 5", but full power auto-restarts in a curved block section can cause more derails. than drag racing on a straight.

 As you have another layout coming, remember this is a test bench, so it should have both a very simple loop, and a complex one to test some limits. Using a different model number turnout at each junction, will let you recreate most issues right there. 

   As a test bench, you will be railing stock there more often than the other tracks. Consider some extra hand space right along side the track closest to you, so you don't "Godzilla" passing trains as often. Consider "sinking" the rails on that section closest to you, i.e. adding a build up similar to a road crossing that would aid in easier railing of stock. Consider using a length (or even loop(s)) of multi-gauge track for testing other scales of trains too. 

Any scenery I'd differ from the large layout. E.g.- If the big one is done as hi-rail, consider Post War/Plasti-ville, or a Tin plate look for the bench. Desert vs greenery, city vs industry, etc. It's an opportunity at variety.

Moonman's plan leaves no esses.

   I'd still add a siding closest to you for railing cars, there's room for that ,or for  making more room for hands.

Adriatic,

This is a test bench as in testing my ideas for control and layout.  It will come down once I have the larger layout designed.  This area will become just a bunch of straights connected to the main layout through the wall eventually.  There will be a straight section for testing like you're talking about and hopefully I'll remember the extra width for hands...that's really good insight!

Moonman,

The bowtie really opens it up at the bench and I'm afraid will be too wide.  I really need to keep it narrow there...or do I.  Now that I think about it (been mulling it over all night and it just hit me), I guess I can take a piece of plywood, put it on top of the upper level of the workbench and see just how intrusive that width becomes.  I don't have to build the whole layout to test that part.

Also, Yours looks closer to the walls.  How close would you dare go? again, I can easily test this. 

I'm on vacation on Long Island for the week...now I kinda want to go home and prototype a bit.

Hi John,

Since you are only working with the pics, look at the pic with the walls in your first post and the one in the bowtie. The blocks (grid) are 5" in SCARM.

You r-loop ends are more square and take more space than the slanted version that put up. So, the space is really close to the same.

I just measured the width over the workbench of the track. The area of length is the same and the width of yours outside rail to outside rail is 19" and the bowtie is 20".

I represented the table in the center wider, but you can build that from tie to tie.

I fit in into the same space as your original, used 054 switches and smoothed it out and set the center spacing at the natural Atlas 4.5". I did use 1 O36 switch for the passing siding at the top.

Check it out when you return home. It fits in the same space and will run better. The center rail spacing in the middle will let you experiment with pairs of #5's for crossovers. they'll just drop-in.

I also tried to use mostly 40" with a few cut and some fitters that can be made from the cut-offs. That will reduce the track cost and the number of joints and give practice with cutting and rail-end kits. I will be a quick build.

You can start wiring with the three isolated loops and switch motors. Then, if you add crossovers or command you can practice on insulating and blocking power distribution.

You'll have a reach issue in the top inside corner, so you'll need an access hatch in the center of that loop or decide how you want to handle it. It's close to 57".

I'll be away when you return, but I can check in for verbal replies.

Enjoy your vacation!

John,

Great idea to test ideas.  I'm curious where the Tal part of the name comes from.  I have no problem with the Maggio part, knowing your name.

I keep toying with names for my layout I want to start designing as soon as our last daughter moves out at her wedding in Sept.  I can't get accurate measurements of her room because of all her stuff I'm afraid of knocking over.  She's been dating her fiancé for almost 9 years, so he knows what he's in for!

Mark Boyce posted:

John,

Great idea to test ideas.  I'm curious where the Tal part of the name comes from.  I have no problem with the Maggio part, knowing your name.

I keep toying with names for my layout I want to start designing as soon as our last daughter moves out at her wedding in Sept.  I can't get accurate measurements of her room because of all her stuff I'm afraid of knocking over.  She's been dating her fiancé for almost 9 years, so he knows what he's in for!

My Fiance is Dr. Talmage.  They called her "Talmagio" sometimes at work during residnecy.  When we met, we kind of knew our smashed up couple name was destined to be "TalMaggio!"  We bought our home together last fall and moved in last January.  It is 5 acres mostly woods.  After the first showing, I turned to her and said "if we buy it, it will be TalMaggio Acres."

My railroad is unnamed at this point.  I have referred to it as Uncle John's Trains in the past.  Perhaps TalMaggio Acres Railway, TARy, TARR, or Talmage-DiMaggio Lines....hmmm...Something to think about while i'm on the beach this afternoon.

Moonman posted:

Hi John,

Check it out when you return home. It fits in the same space and will run better. The center rail spacing in the middle will let you experiment with pairs of #5's for crossovers. they'll just drop-in.

[...]

You'll have a reach issue in the top inside corner, so you'll need an access hatch in the center of that loop or decide how you want to handle it. It's close to 57".

I'll be away when you return, but I can check in for verbal replies.

Enjoy your vacation!

I have SCARM on my laptop.  I put both of your ideas in the same file on different layers.  Headed down to the beach for some sunshine.  I'll peruse after sunset.

THANK YOU for your help!  I knew I wouldn't regret posting this...

Great layout. Can't wait for more pictures of your progress

Looked at it some more.  The two inner loops of Moonman's Bowtie don't have S-Curves.  The outer loop of my original idea had an S-Curve with a 4.5" section in the middle.  I quickly cobbled together a combo option 3 (and used the snipping tool this time so you can see).

I'm pretty sure I only own O-36 switches (3 of them).  So, I might need to see about tweaking the blue lines to use those to keep the budget lower.

SCARM file attached with a layer for each option.

Thoughts?

You have a left turnout on the siding loop already. Reworking just the center track with a pair, you gain space for the track with the worst overhang of all- the 0-27.

O-27 has a worse overhang, past both inside, and outer rails, than a larger diameter curve will have.

It would gain you some space to rework the middle curves on "bench-right"

Hopefully you have 2 lefts and a right .

°John D. posted:

Looked at it some more.  The two inner loops of Moonman's Bowtie don't have S-Curves.  The outer loop of my original idea had an S-Curve with a 4.5" section in the middle.  I quickly cobbled together a combo option 3 (and used the snipping tool this time so you can see).

 

I'm pretty sure I only own O-36 switches (3 of them).  So, I might need to see about tweaking the blue lines to use those to keep the budget lower.

SCARM file attached with a layer for each option.

Thoughts?

The key is to set the straights over the desk at 4.5" center rail spacing and keep the ends at that spacing or more.

The O54 switches in Atlas have a 22.5° turnout. The O36 have a 30°, which messes up the angles. I was also thinking that the O54 will prove more useful for another layout. You can sell and buy switches to minimize any outlay.

I have saved you money by using the long straights, cut longs and the cut-offs for shorter pieces. When you get home, print the parts list and price out the versions. Include the rail-end kits for the cut pieces.

I just don't like the look of the boxy loop. Just me. It takes up more space and adds chunky movement.

I understand working with current inventory. Get creative and get what you need.

Moonman posted:

I just don't like the look of the boxy loop. Just me. It takes up more space and adds chunky movement.

I actually prefer the "chunky" movement as it breaks it up.  With the classic bowtie, my fear is that it will look like three trains on parallel tracks (which it kind of is) whereas this design, the outer loop has some motion in and out that would contrast the straight runs of the inner loops.

I think I am ready to buy materials and build the benchwork.  I think I can work around either option.  I need to get some track on the table and see it in real life.  Part of this experiment is about improving my ability to design layouts.  Getting some track on the table and seeing the reality of the pitfalls will be helpful.

I have some 2x6s and plywood from my last layout.  I think I want to use 2x6 along the walls and then 2x4 everywhere else.  The old layout was built like a deck attached to the walls.  I could (and did) walk on it to lay track, fix fouled consists, etc.  For this one, I'm thinking more free-standing.  

The floor is carpet.  What options have you guys used for leveling the legs?  I'd like my legs to have adjustment so I can re-use them on the next layout. 

John D. posted:

Moonman posted:

I just don't like the look of the boxy loop. Just me. It takes up more space and adds chunky movement.

I actually prefer the "chunky" movement as it breaks it up.  With the classic bowtie, my fear is that it will look like three trains on parallel tracks (which it kind of is) whereas this design, the outer loop has some motion in and out that would contrast the straight runs of the inner loops.

 

LOL. I guess my grandson and I run express trains too much. I like the smooth direction transitions.

Sure, I get that. But, now you are designing a layout rather than a practice lab. Running trains in opposing directions breaks up the concentric look. You'll have a big smile between the cars to look at on that last outside curve for the movement that you want.

Aside from what one likes, you are still increasing the table size of the ends and the reach issue in the top corner.

I think you have enough ideas now to get something up and running.

John D. posted:

I think I am ready to buy materials and build the benchwork.  I think I can work around either option.  I need to get some track on the table and see it in real life.  Part of this experiment is about improving my ability to design layouts.  Getting some track on the table and seeing the reality of the pitfalls will be helpful.

I have some 2x6s and plywood from my last layout.  I think I want to use 2x6 along the walls and then 2x4 everywhere else.  The old layout was built like a deck attached to the walls.  I could (and did) walk on it to lay track, fix fouled consists, etc.  For this one, I'm thinking more free-standing.  

The floor is carpet.  What options have you guys used for leveling the legs?  I'd like my legs to have adjustment so I can re-use them on the next layout. 

A 1/4" T-Nut and a 1/4" carriage bolt or generic appliance foot that has a 1/4" post. Hardware store stuff. I think they use that type of leveler on the modules for the club. The feet are expensive and the bolt head will make a distinct dent in the carpet.

Moonman posted:

John D. posted:

I think I am ready to buy materials and build the benchwork.  I think I can work around either option.  I need to get some track on the table and see it in real life.  Part of this experiment is about improving my ability to design layouts.  Getting some track on the table and seeing the reality of the pitfalls will be helpful.

I have some 2x6s and plywood from my last layout.  I think I want to use 2x6 along the walls and then 2x4 everywhere else.  The old layout was built like a deck attached to the walls.  I could (and did) walk on it to lay track, fix fouled consists, etc.  For this one, I'm thinking more free-standing.  

The floor is carpet.  What options have you guys used for leveling the legs?  I'd like my legs to have adjustment so I can re-use them on the next layout. 

A 1/4" T-Nut and a 1/4" carriage bolt or generic appliance foot that has a 1/4" post. Hardware store stuff. I think they use that type of leveler on the modules for the club. The feet are expensive and the bolt head will make a distinct dent in the carpet.

I'm worried about the ability to adjust this while it is in the carpet.  Yes, that is what we use at our club.  I was thinking something larger.  It will work great on the larger layout which will have a hard floor of some sort (I was told yesterday that there will be no carpet in the basement aside from what was put in the office by the previous owner).

Then again...the price is right for the t-nut and carriage bolt idea.  This is an experiment, so I guess I could make a few legs that way and see. I can always pull them out and "upgrade" the feet.

Is it wrong that I want vacation to hurry up and end so I can go home and start building?

John,

Thank you for the TalMaggio explanation.  I was wondering if Tal came from her name.

As to the t-nut/carriage bolt on carpet problem.  It is similar to a layout I once built on a hardwood floor.  I cut little squares of plywood and placed them under the t-nuts to protect the floor.  You could do the same to make a stable place for your t-nuts

Mark Boyce posted:

As to the t-nut/carriage bolt on carpet problem.  It is similar to a layout I once built on a hardwood floor.  I cut little squares of plywood and placed them under the t-nuts to protect the floor.  You could do the same to make a stable place for your t-nuts

Smart idea!  I assume that once there's weight on them, they'll need further adjustment.  If the head of the bolt is burried in carpet, it could be a challenge to adjust.  On the other hand, without the wood, the bolt head will compress the carpet further with less load and will need less adjustment later.

Did you experience this phenomenon?

I cannot find a photo of what I found at True Value. I put them on a 4 x 8 with felt foot pieces for use on a hardwood floor. They are stamped metal, hexagonal for generic use. It is not anything pretty or having a swivel joint. I'll find the legs that I used and take a pic for you. It's about 1 1/2" foot on a 1/4" threaded rod.

This provides a wider base.

I find that I can lift the table the 1/4" and spin it with a sneaker or boot.

Moonman posted:

I cannot find a photo of what I found at True Value. I put them on a 4 x 8 with felt foot pieces for use on a hardwood floor. They are stamped metal, hexagonal for generic use. It is not anything pretty or having a swivel joint. I'll find the legs that I used and take a pic for you. It's about 1 1/2" foot on a 1/4" threaded rod.

This provides a wider base.

I find that I can lift the table the 1/4" and spin it with a sneaker or boot.

I did a google shopping search for leg levelers and I think I saw what you're talking about plus a dozen other options.  Prices from a dollar to 20 bucks apiece!

here you go - I think it was $3 range + a package of felt pads which you won't need.

Carl,

That is excellent, better than what I did.

 I have used those for lots of things since they came out.   I built the layout on the hardwood floor in the '80s.  It was N-scale, and was so light, the carpet remnants I used before the plywood allowed the layout to slide around if I leaned on it.  I actually lifted each corner to slide out the carpet and slide in the plywood.  On an O gauge layout today, I would use your suggestion on hardwood floor and stuck with my wood on carpet.

   That is a modern appliance leg. I think you can find those with a non-marring plastic on the bottom too.

Spring the extra for stainless steel T-nuts, lock nuts, and feet. Re-check the level on carpet after a few days.

   Did stores stop selling protectors for furniture legs? I've had rubber, hard plastic, steel, aluminum, and even decorative glass ones. "Moving Men" the foam topped furniture sliding disks; if you never used them, try them. Not as pretty, but very good at spreading the load on carpet. I couldn't move a chair without them on carpet, so I have 32 grey discs, and 8 grey rectangles that stay in place.  

   The appliance leg is easier to get a wrench on, but with carriage bolts the head protects the wrench from the floor more.

     Clean the floor, and those felts pads well before, during, and after moving things on hardwood. The pads also catch debris causing small scratches. On a used floor it doesn't always show, but on but new, the little scratches really show easy.

  New sets of deep felt sliders we made is what we always used when refinishing the private libraries . But my Grandma found out the hard way