Point lever
- Peter Butler
- Driver
- Posts: 5293
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:33 pm
- Location: West Wales
Re: Point lever
This observation may be of no use at all, but the Peco SM32 points have over-centre-springs, strong enough to hold the blades in either direction, and which holds in position following a vehicle trailing through. I take advantage of this using a cable system with no lever, just a push-pull action.
Do the 45mm gauge points not have a similar spring? If not, could something similar be fitted?
Do the 45mm gauge points not have a similar spring? If not, could something similar be fitted?
The best things in life are free.... so why am I doing this?
Re: Point lever
Piko points have a centre spring but to my knowledge, none of the others do.Peter Butler wrote: ↑Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:15 pm This observation may be of no use at all, but the Peco SM32 points have over-centre-springs, strong enough to hold the blades in either direction, and which holds in position following a vehicle trailing through. I take advantage of this using a cable system with no lever, just a push-pull action.
Do the 45mm gauge points not have a similar spring? If not, could something similar be fitted?
Rik
- tom_tom_go
- Driver
- Posts: 4824
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:08 am
- Location: Kent, UK
- Contact:
Re: Point lever
I would be surprised if the Peco SM32 points are not the same design as the G45 type?
Re: Point lever
Hi PeterIrishPeter wrote: ↑Mon Oct 29, 2018 2:23 pm Even if you had paid attention in Physics I don't think it would be that much help. In railway applications one has all sorts of real world problems - bird poop, loose grit, slugs leaving trails, etc., etc., which can mess up even NASA's calculations, and they have a bit more than an pocket calculator and a beer mat to work it out with. I have to declare an interest in the results of your experiments as the CLR will hopefully be constructed using trailable points for the passing loops so I can simplify the signalling etc., outside.
Cheers,
Peter in Va
You're so right about all those variables. Even in the workshop, I'm finding the friction inherent in the point itself is enough to resist the mass of the balance weight. Greg Hunter, who is a mathematical whizz, has been doing some calculations on my behalf, but I think it will also require a fair degree of twiddling, tweaking and fettling to get the balance between theory and practice figured out.
If i manage to get some definitive answers (positive or negative), I'll post them here.
Rik
Re: Point lever
Sounds reasonable, Tom. I'm using code 332 rail though, so not had experience with Peco which I think uses code 250.tom_tom_go wrote: ↑Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:37 pm I would be surprised if the Peco SM32 points are not the same design as the G45 type?
Rik
Re: Point lever
I know it can be done in the ride-in scales, as we built some many years ago on a 7.25" garden railway and my mate has one on his current 12" gauge line. However locos. weighing 1-2 tons and rolling stock weighing 200-500lbs don't suffer from the scaling issues encountered in smaller scales. Being able to use a steel offcut weighing a couple of kg as the counterweight on the point lever also helps.
We made some that always returned to the same position and had to be manually held over for the other route when making facing moves. These had the lever biased to one side so it worked between about 85deg and 45 deg.
The 7.25" line had a zig-zag to get down the hill from the workshop and those two point levers were arranged differently. When trailed they returned to the direction they had been set for, so the lever worked symmetrically between about +/-40 deg in both directions.
One of the things we found in large scale which may be relevant in garden scale was that the point lever had to work over a fairly small angle, no more than 45 deg from vertical as I remember. We found that if the lever was laid over too far, the smaller wagons tended to climb over the point blades and derail rather than trail through them. The lighter (relatively speaking) weight on the wheels meant the flanges didn't have the leverage to move the point blades if the point lever was laying flat.
I disagree with Peter, most of the variables are maintenance issues and a mathematical model of a model turnout would be a trivial job for the likes of NASA or Boeing. That sort of thing is above my pay grade though......
The Peco over-centre spring for closing the point blades was mentioned earlier in this thread and this design has been used for donkeys years by various manufacturers. Looking at your photo, Piko use it in their turnouts and there may well be one buried in LGB turnouts.
The over-center spring is used in turnouts designed for use with track power and closes the point blades with more force than needed if track power isn't being used. I doubt they can be trailed unless the spring is removed.
My workbench is covered in tools and track support parts and will be for some time, so I'm not going to be doing any work on this until I get some track laid. I look forward to your experience and conclusions though, whatever the result.
Regards,
Graeme
-
- Cleaner
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2018 10:54 am
- Location: Bournemouth
Re: Point lever
I like your point levers. I will try that method as and when my Tenmill ones start to wear out. See my post on 'long distance point control' in 'help and advice'.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests