Help with my 3 level double track up and back.

[Matthew-1286209]

I use a riser from/too each level and return back through each level how best to do the return back to the lower levels form the top level?

cheers for any help.

Thanks Matthew

Weymouth

Dorset

[96RAF]

You already answered your own question by saying you use a riser to and from each level, then you ask how to do it. The same way down as you went up. What you don’t say is what the gradient is and what train lengths you hope to transition those level changes.

[ModelerXYZ]

Rising trains from one level to another is not dificult. Keeping them moving and on the track while doing it is. The rule with gradients is simple, make the gradient go as long as possible. The shallower the better. You simply put a board along at the required angle.

XYZ

[LTSR_NSE]

A picture/sketch of your track plan would help us to assist you.

The way you have written your request makes it appear that your track design already allows locomotives to reach each level (both ascending and descending) therefore your request for assistance is unclear.

By using the term ‘riser’ do you mean:

• a straight (or gently curved) incline, or gradient between the levels.

• a helix (or circular spiral) between levels

• a lift/elevator between levels (highly unlikely, but covering all bases)

If you have used ascending inclines/gradients (to reach the levels above) then you will probably want to use descending inclines/gradients (to reach the levels below).

If you have used ascending helix(s), then you will probably wish to use descending helix(s).

Finally if you have used a lift/elevator - you could simply run it in reverse!

[Weymatt]

I am using a double track to go up and down via inclines my problem is do I just do a loop joining the up line to return line to go down again?

[atom3624]

How big is the layout?

State the obvious, but traction is very limited, so inclines must be as gentle as possible - some quote 4%, some quote 5% absolute maximum without seriously deteriorating the railway effect.

Al.

[Weymatt]

My layout is 156" x 108" my inclines go around the periphery so about 500" to raise 10" on each level. so incline about 2.5%.

Cheers

Matthew

 

[Weymatt]

The inclines are strait and curve around the periphery with a rise of about 2.5%.

Cheers

Matthew

 

[96RAF]

Per cent = per hundred, hence 1 in 100 is 1%, 1 in 50 is 2%, 1 in 200 is 1/2%, etc.

Bring curves into the gradient and you effectively increase the angle.

[Weymatt]

In can find few layouts using separate tracks to go up and down, most seem to use the same tracks, ie single track this would surly restrict movement with up and down travel. Having to wait for each other to clear the tracks or am I missing something?

[96RAF]

No idea, but a picture of the layout plan would help us better understand your concerns.

[atom3624]

Sounds a decent size.

10 in 500 = 1 in 50 = 2% - that's reasonable I would have thought.

Agreed, curves add another 'drag' aspect.

Al.

[Weymatt]

How do I get photos/Plans into a reply?

[96RAF]

You take a photo and insert it onto the reply box by use of the arrowed icon in this picture. There is a sticky post explaining it - important information for new users...

[Rog RJ]

Then you wait for a moderator to approve it before your post will be visible

[Weymatt]



[ModelerXYZ]

Are the 3 pictures each level?

XYZ

[Weymatt]

Yes thats correct.

Middle, Top & Base descending.

Cheers

Matthew

[ModelerXYZ]

Are the top and bottom levels over and under the middle level or next to them?

This makes a lot of difference with the track geomotry as well as the length needed for inclines.

[Weymatt]

Yes that is correct the risers go on the periphery with a total length is 560" to rise 12" on each layer 2% to 2.5% rise.

I hope this makes sense.

Many thanks for your interest.

Matthew

[96RAF]

560/12 is 1 in 26 or around 4%.

[What About The Bee]

Hi 96RAF

Isn't the incline measured as rise over run? For a rise of 12" over 560", I get 12/560 = 0.0214. Multiply by 100 to get 2.1%

Am I doing this wrong?

Bee

[96RAF]

I wondered about that so I used 12 in 560 = 1.2 in 56 which is steeper than 1 in 50, but not as steep as my original 1 in 26. My big sums days are done I reckon. I use a digital level to check on the board. Mine was 3” in 12’.

Edit - oddly my day job used to be calculating angles and levels for airfield arresting gear, so my big sums had to be exact to the mm over many tens of metres.

[What About The Bee]

Arithmetic mistakes can creep into anyone's calculation 96RAF. Especially mine! 🤷‍♂️ Long ago, I grovelled at the feet of a true genius. The man had 50, count em, 50 US patents. I was one of his reports. He would question every mathematical result I put before him, demanding that I put the numbers (with units) on a piece of paper. This was no use of course, when presented with such a calculation written out, he would say "Those are just numbers on a piece of paper". Quite the character.

Hi Matthew 👋.

Anyone who can come up with such a complicated layout, over multiple levels, surely does not need to be told how to return to lower levels. The play value will be something only you can answer.

If it were me, I'd call the incline the Wapping Tunnel, and have it directly in front the operator. This presents as a "half tunnel" you can see inside, with the cavity lined with the material of your choice. Some lights on the wayside and it becomes an attractive feature, a different perspective. But hey ho, that's just me.

Bee

[Weymatt]

Hi Bee

Maybe should know how to do this but I don't know how to cope with the + and - rails meeting when I connect to the down line I don't see it as a return loop, am I correct in thinking this?

I see a single line going up and through each level and getting to the top a return line going back through each level and back to the base via the other rail taking me back down through each level, have missed the point here?

Cheers

Matthew