I'm building my first layout and I wondered how many of you have drawn up detailed & scaled plans of your layout before even purchasing a single piece of track or base?
I've seen a lot of (helpful) YouTube videos that have suggested drawing the layout on the baseboard, but none that have put together separate drawings or any electrical wiring plans which can be referred back to after.
My layout is going to be mobile for shows but a little on the large side (roughly 8ft x 3ft) with lights, sensors and turnout controls - and drawing the whole thing up was one of the first things I thought about doing.
Much to the annoyance of my girlfriend (who just wants me to get on and build the thing so she can do the scenery), I've built a little test circuit to test various parts (electronics, turnout motors etc) - but I messed up with this. Unknowingly I located a set of turnouts above a baseboard strengthening strut, which meant I couldn't locate the motor underneath it. It's something relatively minor now and was easily fixed on my test layout, but got me thinking, maybe I need to draw up my base and overlay the other plans as well. I'll need to consider how I'm going to split my layout for transportation too, and how to put it back together quickly too.
I always say fail to prepare, prepare to fail, but are we all too eager and excited to get started that we overlook the simple details which could be highlighted through planning and drawing? This is a hobby if course - what's the rush?
Yes, I have planned my layouts thoroughly before starting, using the AnyRail programme, including the major aspects of scenery, buildings and wiring. This is probably my favourite part of modelling - I have many plans of layouts that I will never build, but I get some of the pleasure just from looking at the plan (and in some cases a Google Sketchup 3-D model of the layout). Incidentally, I have found that AnyRail plans are exactly right when you come to build the real thing.
I think that a test circuit is exactly the way to go. 8x3 is a big layout for one person to build and will take years to finish. As your first layout you will probably find that during this time you will realise what you really wanted to build, or that some aspect of construction is less than perfect and doesn't meet your rising standards. Many first time layouts get dismantled before they are finished for this reason.
I would suggest you work up your test circuit into a working mini layout and get your girlfriend to practice scenery on this. This will take a few weeks, during which time you can plan your larger layout.
Cheers Jon :)
I always plan my layout with Anyrail, I find it really important as I use Kato Unitrack, Even though I have gone through about 3 changes on The layout the modifications are always done on Anyrail to make sure I have no cuts to make.
My layout will take a couple of years to finish ie scenery, but the enjoyment of the finished layout will give me more years of enjoyment when I retire.
Likewise - I have used AnyRail to plan my layout and spent some months working out the electrical control system (in my head but not on paper) considering things like point operation and indication, using one or two controllers, how to eliminate connections between baseboards etc. etc.
Once I had something physical in front of me, like the baseboards, I went back to the track plan several times to adjust for such things as positioning of point motors so as to avoid parts of the wood work.
I think there can be a point though, a point I have reached I'm afraid, where you keep making minor adjustments to the plan and don't actually lay any track!! There always seems to be something else to consider before you start.
Good luck with your planning and layout.
:beers:
I'm an AnyRail fan as well and have spent many an hour 'designing' various layouts.
I printed out the one I'm actually building full size (buy spare ink and a ream of paper!) and laid it on the boards. Inevitably once seen as a full size plan I wanted to adjust a few areas. Mainly to hopefully improve scenic rather than operational ideas but that may well change again as the build go on.
For me, remote point control will be by wire in tube but that part is a long way off yet.
Good luck with the build and have fun. Will look out for your updates.
Dave G
Looks like I'm an odd one out as my plan, such as it was, remained in my head until I knew exactly what I wanted from the layout i.e. double track main line loops for watching trains go by and a single bi-directional branch line with goods and loco facilities. This was then built using the maximum radii curves possible and Peco turnout templates. Tracksettas were used (including a straight one).
However, the yard was rehashed several times to get what I wanted, and I was aware (from bitter experience) not to put cross braces into the baseboard until the point positions were fixed.
No planning software or drawings were harmed in the creation of this layout.
For my second, smaller layout, I did resort to the SCARM track planning system - not from necessity but more a wish to get to grips with the system itself.
Maybe to keep your girlfriend happy you could place a bent (looks better than straight) piece of flexitrack on a raised piece of baseboard and let her create a small diorama that could (a) hone her scenic skills and (b) act as somewhere to photograph any loco/rolling stock purchases.
I am a big fan of SCARM, like Mick. My first layout didn't take into account point motors, so I had to do some butchery with my pull saw underneath. Fortunately not to much. Then I decided to raise the inner loop up so it was about 2" above the outer folder 8. So more butchery. This time I'm using Kato track, so no butchery required. I designed using SCARM, had a look at the 3D view, altered slightly then printed off the full sized plan and stuck it down to the board with tape.
Definitely Plan Ahead...
In fact in the clubrooms we currently have a section of an OS map blown up to full size for N gauge, which we are in the process of chopping up and rearranging to make it a manageable size but keeping the key features and feel of the original location...
Watch this space to see what it is or if you visit the show next week you might get a sneaky preview!
http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=27742.msg303559#msg303559 (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=27742.msg303559#msg303559)
Another SCARM user here... in fact I've designed 7 layouts with it so far (note I said "designed", not "built" ;) ).
My design process goes something like:
1) come up with idea in head, possibly inspired from other layouts
2) sketch it out on paper
3) lay out some track to see if it works in principle
4) refine the design with SCARM
5) lay out more track, modifying as I go along
6) run trains to see if it "works".
At some point in this decade I envisage doing:
7) fixing the track, wiring it up and adding scenery'n'stuff.
Mind you I've only been at this for less than a year, and I'm glad I didn't go with my first design, which would have been an uninspiring roundy-roundy.
I must also add that I'm kind of "cheating" by using Kato Unitrack and Tomix Finetrack, which make it easy to put together provisionally working layouts without actually fixing track down, which makes operational "debugging" much easier. If I were modelling an actual prototype, my approach would be somewhat more systematic, but at this point all I want is a) something very Rule 1 vaguely set in Japan, and b) trains running round and round in interesting ways. The current setup (folded dogbone) is already enough to keep a 4-month old baby fascinated for up to 20 minutes so I must be on the right line, so to speak.
My layout I am building was designed using SCARM after drawing up a list of what I wanted. I considered the splits in my baseboards as I designed but as just spread strengthening braces fairly evenly rather than exactly I didn't consider these... This has meant as I started placing points I had to move the points to fit in around beams etc. I have also used my plan as a guide rather than fixed plan as once I started laying out the track I would change the curves to be more pleasing to the eye and also my whole layout has changed dramatically as I laid track as I found the original plan "didn't work". I know everyone is different but I personally believe you need some form of dynamic/adaptable plan.
With regards to wiring I am DCC and this is quite complex and again I have found this has evolved as the layout grew but I have basic principles I have stuck to with wire colouring and blocks etc. I hope that makes sense. Also not fully decided what I am using for lighting etc so again will develop as it progresses.
Quote from: Vonk on May 29, 2015, 05:55:52 PM
My layout I am building was designed using SCARM after drawing up a list of what I wanted. I considered the splits in my baseboards as I designed but as just spread strengthening braces fairly evenly rather than exactly I didn't consider these... This has meant as I started placing points I had to move the points to fit in around beams etc. I have also used my plan as a guide rather than fixed plan as once I started laying out the track I would change the curves to be more pleasing to the eye and also my whole layout has changed dramatically as I laid track as I found the original plan "didn't work". I know everyone is different but I personally believe you need some form of dynamic/adaptable plan.
With regards to wiring I am DCC and this is quite complex and again I have found this has evolved as the layout grew but I have basic principles I have stuck to with wire colouring and blocks etc. I hope that makes sense. Also not fully decided what I am using for lighting etc so again will develop as it progresses.
This point placing issue is a problem and I'm sure that even after trying to figure out where they go in relation to the baseboard bracing I'm going to have to bodge things somewhere. With this in mind I have only screwed rather than glued the braces so I can take them out and modify them if need be. What a palaver ehhh?
:beers:
After a long day on the road (stupid half term holiday traffic), I finally managed to get 15mins to read the replies. Thanks for them all.
I've just had a quick look at both bits of software which look great and will be a really useful tool for laying down the track and scenery plan. I'll print these out to scale and then draw over electrical wiring routes and baseboard details on tracing over-lay.
After the advice on letting the girlfriend practice scenery on the test layout - I might gift this one to her (how lucky is she!)
Quote from: newportnobby on May 29, 2015, 10:28:07 AM
Looks like I'm an odd one out as my plan, such as it was, remained in my head until I knew exactly what I wanted from the layout i.e. double track main line loops for watching trains go by and a single bi-directional branch line with goods and loco facilities.
Im with Nobby on this (not actually 'with' him as I live in Da Souf and he inhabits the tundra I believe)
Ruleoneshire started life as a bare 7ft X3ft board and
evolved till it started to take shape of something I had in the back of my brain cell. Many errors were made and that's probably going to be an on going situation but my satisfaction comes from solving the problems and correcting them to my satisfaction
I'm probably a lone voice here but yes, by all means plan, plan and plan again. However I use anything but a computer programme; much easier just to draw a rough 12" square grid pattern on the back of an envelope and draw the plan onto that.
I find it works, can be done anywhere and is far more flexible and quicker than computers!
But, as I say, I am probably almost alone in this these days.
But however much I plan, on paper or computer, I usually change something when it comes to track laying, such as adding an extra siding or moving the goods shed to a better location.
Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on May 30, 2015, 11:12:24 AM
I'm probably a lone voice here but yes, by all means plan, plan and plan again. However I use anything but a computer programme; much easier just to draw a rough 12" square grid pattern on the back of an envelope and draw the plan onto that.
I find it works, can be done anywhere and is far more flexible and quicker than computers!
But, as I say, I am probably alone in this these days.
But however much I plan, on paper or computer, I usually change something when it comes to track laying.
I use AnyRail for my track planning. BUT... I must say it is sometimes very annoying when you want to do a slight modification, which you intuitively know will work, but the software just will not allow you modify the plan the way you want to!! Very frustrating.
I guess that you should really treat track planning software as a tool rather than a means to an end. Sometimes it helps to use software sometimes it doesn't.
:beers:
Quote from: austinbob on May 30, 2015, 11:16:40 AM
Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on May 30, 2015, 11:12:24 AM
I'm probably a lone voice here but yes, by all means plan, plan and plan again. However I use anything but a computer programme; much easier just to draw a rough 12" square grid pattern on the back of an envelope and draw the plan onto that.
I find it works, can be done anywhere and is far more flexible and quicker than computers!
But, as I say, I am probably alone in this these days.
But however much I plan, on paper or computer, I usually change something when it comes to track laying.
I use AnyRail for my track planning. BUT... I must say it is sometimes very annoying when you want to do a slight modification, which you intuitively know will work, but the software just will not allow you modify the plan the way you want to!! Very frustrating.
I guess that you should really treat track planning software as a tool rather than a means to an end. Sometimes it helps to use software sometimes it doesn't.
:beers:
My point exactly. Also getting just the right angle of curve using flexitrack can be awkward on a computer, but easy by hand.
Although I've used Anyrail to get ideas for layouts and play around with track plans I prefer to plan 1:1 to get a real feel for how it will look. This is what I did with my current layout:-
Having bought the boards I planned the entire thing out on the lounge floor using Peco point templates, a pencil, a couple of trains and vehicles for sizing, and a full-size cardboard template of the station I wanted to fit on one board:-
(http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m220/Sprintex1/070816%20LayoutLeft_zpsfxqukkak.jpg)
(http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m220/Sprintex1/070816%20LayoutRight_zpscftsnzau.jpg)
Once happy with it I went over it in marker pen as you can see, although a couple of things did change along the way once construction started. All this was long before I discovered track-planning software so I had to reverse-plan in Anyrail later on :thumbsup:
Paul
I find a mix of techniques works best, since no single approach does everything perfectly.
I start the basic planning with pen and paper, freehand, using a 6" grid for N - just the right size for a loco, coach, point or a half radius for a minimum curve. Then Anyrail is great for figuring out complex pointwork and proving that all fits (and can be done with the 50-track-piece free version). After that, draw it out full size on large sheets of paper stuck down to a table or the baseboard (you can get rolls of 12' x 2'6" gaming paper with 1" squares for a few dollars). Then finish up with whatever real track, point templates, buildings, vehicles, etc. you have placed on the full size version to really get a good picture.
And for the last couple of layouts, I didn't place the internal framing timbers until after the trackplan and point positions had been finalised and drawn onto the baseboard. And still managed to get one point motor wrong. Sigh.
:laughabovepost: We've all been there, or someplace very like it! :laugh3:
Each to his/her own with this one I think.
I started off with a computer program called 3D Planit and found that this was much harder than using a pencil, paper, and an eraser (rubber). From limited knowledge of it al reading the experiences of posters on this and other forumsl, it seems to me that the computer planning programs work well with set track, but my layout has all connections between points as flex track and the software proved to be quite awkward and not versatile. So in my case, I went from a pencilled A4 track plan to a full size paper plan from which the baseboard and everything else were designed. On the full size plan I still used the pencil and eraser to good effect.
Webbo
Quote from: Webbo on May 31, 2015, 09:42:41 AM
Each to his/her own with this one I think.
I started off with a computer program called 3D Planit and found that this was much harder than using a pencil, paper, and an eraser (rubber). From limited knowledge of it al reading the experiences of posters on this and other forumsl, it seems to me that the computer planning programs work well with set track, but my layout has all connections between points as flex track and the software proved to be quite awkward and not versatile. So in my case, I went from a pencilled A4 track plan to a full size paper plan from which the baseboard and everything else were designed. On the full size plan I still used the pencil and eraser to good effect.
Webbo
Hi Webbo, you're quite right, each to his own, but just for the record I find AnyRail pretty good for flex track, and I always plan track layouts exactly before track laying.
Cheers Jon :)
I can't really say I planned mine 100% beforehand but it's going ok so far.
I started by measuring out the space I had to play with and went to my local Wickes to see what boards they have. After buying three 4x2 chipboards, I went home and opened up Anyrail. This software has a tool for drawing shapes, so I simply made 3 rectangles the same size as my boards, arranged them in an L shape and started putting track over the shapes.
While the trackplan was forming, I made a frame for the baseboards and built the legs. They weren't thoroughly planned beforehand but I was careful to be sure the legs and frames on each section didn't interfere with other sections when they were put together. I also used large bolts to hold the legs on and hold the sections together which could be easily dis-assembled should the layout ever need to be moved.
Granted, it looks a bit bodged, but it's sturdy, level and doesn't rock or creek when I lean on it. :thumbsup:
Once I was happy with a plan, I got a few pieces of track and drew around them with a pencil to form an outline of the trackplan on the baseboards. As my build thread shows, (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=27732.0) this is when I realised problems with the plan and made adjustments.
One thing I will say is that planning software is good for visualising your ideas and developing your plans, but ultimately, before gluing down any track, I strongly recommend drawing an outline using the actual track on your baseboards to make sure it all fits and works and that you're happy with it. :beers:
Just to illustrate how far you can go with using software to visualise the layout - if you want to....
Here is a technique where I have exported a .jpg from Anyrail into Sketchup, and built the layout onto it.
This future layout is based around the "Burgstadt" station (a nostalgia trip, another story...) so I have built an accurate though not detailed Sketchup model of the station and used this within the bigger layout model.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/24/thumb_25545.png) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=25545)
This, would you believe is an early version of Horseblock Lane; 50 or so iterations before the final plan, (which tells another story about plan many, cut once). This is "opposite hand" - it needed to be flipped to suit the 3 way points Neal eventually used.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/24/thumb_25546.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=25546)
By the way, these are pretty simple SketchUp models - I have seen much, much more detailed ones on this forum.
These are just for interest by the way; I'm not trying to convert anyone. Maybe we should have Rule 2 - "It's my layout so I will design it how I want".
Cheers Jon :)
If it wasn't for planning I wouldn't be a railway modeller, rather just an onlooker.
Quote from: PostModN66 on June 02, 2015, 11:51:05 AM
Just to illustrate how far you can go with using software to visualise the layout - if you want to....
Here is a technique where I have exported a .jpg from Anyrail into Sketchup, and built the layout onto it.
This future layout is based around the "Burgstadt" station (a nostalgia trip, another story...) so I have built an accurate though not detailed Sketchup model of the station and used this within the bigger layout model.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/24/thumb_25545.png) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=25545)
This, would you believe is an early version of Horseblock Lane; 50 or so iterations before the final plan, (which tells another story about plan many, cut once). This is "opposite hand" - it needed to be flipped to suit the 3 way points Neal eventually used.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/24/thumb_25546.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=25546)
By the way, these are pretty simple SketchUp models - I have seen much, much more detailed ones on this forum.
These are just for interest by the way; I'm not trying to convert anyone. Maybe we should have Rule 2 - "It's my layout so I will design it how I want".
Cheers Jon :)
Most impressive Jon, but as Tank can verify I have trouble just replying to a simple post here sometimes, as I did over his 'Chris Green' thread.
But I give you an unreserved 'thumbs up' :thumbsup: over Rule Two.
Quote from: Gregcov2134 on May 29, 2015, 06:31:18 AM
I'm building my first layout and I wondered how many of you have drawn up detailed & scaled plans of your layout before even purchasing a single piece of track or base?
AnyRail here too. I spent almost a full year planning before I even purchased the wood for building. In that time the plan underwent a good number of minor modifications and important tweaks that (eventually) will make for much better operations that the original version.
You can even use the plan to work out where the baseboard support structure will go, and avoid placing struts underneath points. I used Photoshop to overlay the semi-transparent track plan on the support plan, and was able to tweak the supports to get them out of the way.
Quote from: Gregcov2134 on May 29, 2015, 06:31:18 AM
Unknowingly I located a set of turnouts above a baseboard strengthening strut, which meant I couldn't locate the motor underneath it.
Having said that, a last-minute amendment resulted in some points being located over the support struts (*cough* whoops!). The solution was to install cranks - a strip of brass, for instance, linked to the tie bar on the points at one end and to the points motor at the other end. I've found that there's a solution to almost any problem. You just have to research it or have someone very wise to whisper the answer into your ear.
' .... You just have to research it or have someone very wise to whisper the answer into your ear.'
How right you are, Pete and more often then not, the whisper's from someone on the NGF!
:NGF:
Dave G
Is there really such a major problem with point motors located above support struts? In my case, my support struts are 1x4s and these can stand a 1.5" deep notch to take a Peco point motor no worries. If you really want to ensure the maintenance of structural strength through the strut after it has been notched, one way is to screw the baseboard to the strut on either side of the notch (preferred) or to reinforce the strut below the notch (messier).
I have found that are really good way of cutting notches through baseboards and struts even after they have been installed is the multifunction tool shown in the following:
http://www.bosch-do-it.com.au/au/en/diy/power-tools/c203707/p116410/multifunction-tools/pmf-180-e.html (http://www.bosch-do-it.com.au/au/en/diy/power-tools/c203707/p116410/multifunction-tools/pmf-180-e.html)
I'm not endorsing Bosch in particular as I know that there are other makes of these tools as well. Great tool for making cuts in tight situations elsewhere as well.
Webbo
Quote from: daveg on June 03, 2015, 04:12:49 PM
How right you are, Pete and more often then not, the whisper's from someone on the NGF!
Exactly, Dave. Although in my case that's 50% true. In terms of layout construction the other 50% is provided by an ex-telephone engineer who is a complete obsessive about automated layouts.
Quote from: Webbo on June 04, 2015, 04:51:02 AM
Is there really such a major problem with point motors located above support struts? In my case, my support struts are 1x4s and these can stand a 1.5" deep notch to take a Peco point motor no worries.
Do you really want to be chopping bits out of your support struts though? The odd one or two might be okay, but beware the woodworm effect.
I suspect that with Webbo using 4" deep battens, a slice out of that wouldn't have too much affect.
Certainly wouldn't want to try that on my 'flimsy' 2"x1". Drilled holes for cables is risky enough!
As done by Pete, I looked at my AnyRail plan to check are the points were in relation to where battens should probably go. I cheated by just adding red lines over a copy (not original) of the plan to show the positions.
I have now made the executive decision to go Wire in Tube and will surface mount the wires so avoiding the battens issue. I will however have to allow for the depth of the tube and will have to make 'topside' arrangements to suit.
Dave G
Quote from: daveg on June 04, 2015, 05:12:15 PM
I have now made the executive decision to go Wire in Tube and will surface mount the wires so avoiding the battens issue. I will however have to allow for the depth of the tube and will have to make 'topside' arrangements to suit.
Dave G
Hurrah! :thumbsup:
I top the baseboard with Sundeala (over the ply) - it is great to lay track onto, fairly easy to dig out the channels for the WiT and you can make little embankments, culverts or ponds too.
Other toppings are available!
Cheers Jon :)
To be sure, when you dig a hole in a strut and apply significant downward pressure at the site of the notch there will be a greater tendency for the strut to fold upwards at that point. However, if one has a nice sturdy baseboard fastened to the strut on either side of the notch strut the tendency to fold up will be counteracted by a sideways force exerted by the baseboard across the notch. Same principle operates with box girders. My baseboard is 9 mm ply and I'm confident that notching my struts does not weaken them appreciably. The impact on strength will of course depend on the depth of the notch compared to the depth of the strut.
Webbo
Back in the day folks used to cut a 'V' in cross braces through which to thread wiring until someone had the :idea: of drilling holes
Quote from: newportnobby on June 05, 2015, 09:18:21 AM
Back in the day folks used to cut a 'V' in cross braces through which to thread wiring until someone had the :idea: of drilling holes
Sort of the same principle.